45
A Linux Hardware Maker is Convincing Colorado to Leave Open Source Alone (itsfoss.com)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/opensource@programming.dev
comment fedilink hide all child comments
 

Carl Richell, the founder of System76, has shared that Colorado's Age Attestation Bill (SB26-051) is set to be amended to exclude open source software from its requirements.

The proposed amendment would exclude open source operating systems and apps, code repositories like GitHub and GitLab, and containers like Docker and Podman.

We covered this bill back in February, when it made no such distinction. Carl has been working directly with Colorado Senator Matt Ball, the bill's co-author, to push for these exclusions since then, and it looks like his efforts are paying off.

no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
6 comments in c/linux@programming.dev view that post
[–] 52 points 6 months ago (1 child)

Great work! Hopefully this will spread.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 27 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Even happier I paid them for my first off the shelf Linux, so I wouldn’t have to deal with hardware issues straight out.

    I wish more people would realize state level guys are accessible. I’m not even a front man for anything, like this guy is, and I’ve had 2 reps call me. State reps are NOT like the feds. You can talk to them. And in big enough numbers you can affect change. It is, in part, why some states have things like mandated lunch breaks while others do not.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    Absolutely. It's incredibly easy to get on an actual direct phone call with a state rep. You can get the cell phone numbers of mayors, sheriffs, or pretty much any public official with a bit of digging and willingness to speak to their assistants a bit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    Would this also include Android?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    3 comments in c/linux@piefed.blahaj.zone view that post
    [–] 8 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    Something that keeps coming to mind with these laws made for industries they don’t understand…

    How do they expect server farms and companies to function? Whose credentials are attached to a computer that’s used by a dozen people? And when a company orders a whole fleet of laptops, does one technician have to attach their identity to the dozens of machines that will be deployed?

    There’s just zero thought put into this and we’ll yet again have a dozen leopard eating face stories from major businesses that lobbied for this administration complaining that these restrictions are crippling their productivity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    The law specifies that the age flag should be attached to the user's account, not the machine, so there is no need for anyone to attach their identity to the laptops. Likewise, in a server farm, it will be the account of the admin that's used when they are working on them, I'd imagine you would mark daemon accounts as the lowest level, as they would not need the extra access.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago*

    In my previous jobs, we had to get the account setup first before giving it to the user. We would go in and sign them into all of their tools as we were transferring their data from older machines.

    The point is that few things are the best case scenario. That’s the issue. They seem to think computers work like the government. They’re a tool. Like a hammer or a paintbrush. The idea of trying to attach an account or physical machine to a person is silly because it’s inherently transient. Locking them down further only serves to make the hammer less useful.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent