7
Ownership and Storage (jeferson.me)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This isn't so strong on the coding part, but touch in some degree on this regard. The focus is on the data storage and access of data. I hope you like this post.

All feedback is welcome.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I agree, on the past I had a proposal that the OS should have a device level API to provide this information, in this case apps and (the browser as an APP) would be able to consume this information from the device. And it's up to the device manufacturer (or the OS installed) to add a age system.

I not denying that there is holes in this idea. Linux users could simply add a simple form with "I was born 01-01-1900" and everything would continue the same. But on the MicroSlop, Gargle and iPear worlds, they would be able to validate once and keep the information on the device. And each webpage, app and such won't be able to ingest your personal/private data.

On this post, I do explore little bit this, but I do focus on the idea of storage and access of data.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child)

    I agree, on the past I had a proposal that the OS should have a device level API to provide this information, in this case apps and (the browser as an APP) would be able to consume this information from the device. And it's up to the device manufacturer (or the OS installed) to add a age system.

    This, to some extent, already exists as law in the US. In some jurisdictions, the OS must soon request the age from the user and provide it to some applications. It's not verification though, or at least it's not required to be.

    Linux users could simply add a simple form with "I was born 01-01-1900" and everything would continue the same.

    This started a whole war over systemd even adding a field for it (not a form). If they added a required form, it would probably start WW3.

    But on the MicroSlop, Gargle and iPear worlds, they would be able to validate once and keep the information on the device.

    No thanks. I'm not validating, so I'd be picking up the next Motorola phone with GrapheneOS on it instead.

    Edit: to elaborate more, because the phone manufacturer is a third party and most likely sells or otherwise makes available that data to other third parties. It's also a form of deanonymization through an untrusted party.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago

    I agree, on the past [...]

    This, to some extent, already exists as law in the US. In some jurisdictions, the OS must soon request the age from the user and provide it to some applications. It’s not verification though, or at least it’s not required to be.

    Sadly the regime in US is kind of crazy right now. So the trust in the government is degrading, and maybe can be recover in the next decade. But for sure change is needed, on the age verification also.

    But I think that age verification should be a device level API, and this follows to the next...

    Linux users could simply add a simple form with “I was born 01-01-1900” [...]

    This started a whole war over systemd even adding a field for it (not a form). If they added a required form, it would probably start WW3.

    Linux is a unique case, while they are open, flexible and easy to make your own distro, this also implies that a public distro should implement this API, and since this API is on the OS not on Kernel. Which means people fighting, but they can just ignore this API and make it return false to any and every request.

    While distros like Ubuntu and maybe Fedora would follow (providing the baseline for the dependent distros), so they can also add a third-party validation layer, which also can be replaced with the government, or a fake one that always says that you are over 99 years old.

    Truth to be told, this is a band-aid on the storage and ownership problem, the focus of the post. With the correct layer the OS can keep your "age" with a lease, and you on your phone can use the app to renew the lease whenever you need.

    Again, this isn't a perfect solution, I would even call it a solution since it have so many holes in it. But it's the point of the conversation.

    But on the MicroSlop, Gargle and iPear worlds, [...]

    No thanks. I’m not validating, so I’d be picking up the next Motorola phone with GrapheneOS on it instead.

    Hell yeah!
    Totally, and with fake API's to make every page guessing my age wrong! This data sucker can suck my....
    Jokes aside, I'm with you on this one, let the OS choose, even if this is just a form with "Birth" field and let the government verification as a different problem.

    Like I discussed in the post, the moment you have heavy fines for keeping illegal data, and requires the user to take action to lease the information, we will start to notice how much data these big-tech have on us.

    Ps.: Thanks for reading the post and following on the conversation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent