Other open source software gets similar treatment, with Colorado going as far as explicitly excluding code repositories and container platforms.

all 39 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 123 points 5 months ago

Its not enough. Eradicate the bills.

  • source
  • [–] 71 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    oh wow gee thank you for not… [checks notes]… forcing open source developers to write state mandated spyware without compensation

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 101 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    It's not really a win though. It just means Linux will get blocked by platforms.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    The fun part of open source is that someone smarter than me will inevitably just update the existing spoofing tools to include whatever checks those platforms are using.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    A number of VPNs have tools to let you spoof browser IDs. It's useful if you want to access YouTube and pretend you're on Chrome to get better performance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    You don’t need a VPN to spoof the user agent of a web-browser. Quite literally type User Agent Switcher in the Mozilla plugin page and you’ll have a plethora to choose from.

    The problem with this is Chromium based browsers work outside the standards for web-development, they implement features/protocols that Firefox or non-chromium based browsers do not comply with as it does not meet the specifications laid out, this is where you get people saying “Use Chrome if Firefox doesn’t work” but ultimately that’s a load of bull shit.

    Follow the standards and specifications and your website will work on literally every browser out there, well, except those that are heavily outdated.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 43 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    Waiting for....

    403 Unauthorized

    We're sorry, your browser has not provided us with age verification, and so we are unable to show you our cat videos.

    Reason:
    User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/148.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    So what's the point in the bill then? They're prepared to accept that open source solutions don't have to implement it then they have to accept that the whole idea is daft anyway.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child)

    Not exactly. They can always take this one step further and make it more difficult to use anything but closed OSs for fundamental applications, like banking. It could come via an ID requirement where authentication goes through some complicated process with proprietary hardware and drivers. That could also come in phases, such as mandating all desktop/laptop distributors require it prior to distribution. Then the tech giants can market it like, “never require a password again, if you have…” effectively marketing back the convenience they helped take. Sooner or later, it’s a piece of shit system that banks and jobs rely on, everybody ends up accepting it while complaining that it makes a terrible password for obvious reasons (ref: your Social Security card).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 16 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    We actually "won"? They're not gonna do something suspicious at all? (͡•_ ͡• )

    Although this treatment is still not enough, we need the bill to evaporate from the surface of earth

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    I would not accuse the legislators of any decency of thought only that open source would be far harder to police due to its more nebulous and intermingled path to the client with far less money at the end of it.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    There may have also been some big money lobbyists from companies like Google, Amazon, etc, that pointed out how much money it would have cost their poor shareholders to implement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago

    The entire dynamic is off somehow, so age verification is for the safety of children but won't be implemented on some platforms for reasons that are by extension more pressing than child safety, as if such reasons might exist. It is almost like age verification is actually nothing to do with child safety.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    I haven't heard anyone saying they want to take this to a referendum in Colorado. If we collect enough signatures, the bill has to go on the November ballot and we can collectively vote it down as a state. Even if we lose, it might buy us time.

    Why is no one talking about this? Why is there no info about anyone doing anything right now? All I see are daily threads about how we should do something.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago

    Because it's difficult, confusing, or sometimes both. I'm not from CO so I can't speak to whether or not that part is confusing or not (though I'd not be surprised if the average citizen wasn't even aware this was an option for them.) The hard part would be that you have to collect signatures which eats up time.

    Which isn't to say you shouldn't do it. I think it's a great idea!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    We were distracted by fucking Jared Polis' new fling. I wasnt, I contacted my rep in Lakewood about it. Who then voted for it anyways. Fucking suburbs nothing ever changes

    The bill passed and was signed. The next option is legal battles.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 6 points 5 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    It's back to the same question from the early days of the Internet. "How do you know the person you are talking to isn't a cat?". How can you know they aren't a cat or maybe a clever monkey taking a break from typing Shakespeare, or how old they are, or who they even are?

    You can't.

    You can implement every security measure available and anyone can simply lie or bypass it.

    If by some miracle they actually implemented some age verification tech for OS and websites and the Internet as a whole, it will just pop up an underground market of "fake IDs" or hacks to get past it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Same with Flock and Ring and all the smartphone apps with location access we carry around all day.

    We've slowly given away every last shred of privacy and have no increased security or happiness from it. In fact I believe our safety and security is FAR worse under mass surveillance than if we simply "did nothing". Surveillance and police and punishment do not really stop crime or help protect anyone, it just opens up dozens of other avenues for harm.

    Also, I don't know about you guys, but I feel icky being out in public now. I'm so painfully aware that I'm being filmed from 15 different angles as I walk or drive or do anything, I feel like I'm being stalked and it's creepy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    My inbox is flooded with doomsayers and fear mongering about how they're going to kill Linux because of this and no matter how hard I tried to convince them that it would be physically impossible to enforce such a law/rule on open source software they just wouldn't listen.

    Looks like the blokes in calif had to eat a lot of truth to come to this decision.

    O, before you comment I am fully expecting more doomsayers. So please enlighten me.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    A future Linux install prompt: "Which state do you live?"

    Everyone: Why, "California", of course. Glad you asked.

    There's no way to enforce age verification, like on websites or closed software, in even normal circumstances, but if it's open source or offline how could you even begin to attempt it? It's so silly.

  • source
  • parent