• trackball_fetish@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Lots of disingenuous comments in this thread regarding the change being “just json” considering they’re already on a warpath of implementing id verification. They are testing the water to see what they can get away with. Furthermore, the Linux community has always been against shit like this (see: systemd outrage, open bios, gnu etc).

    • luciferofastora@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I’ll believe that if and when they actually force me to upload identification to prove that my birthday really is 1970-01-01 and my name really is Nunya Bissnis. Otherwise, it’s really no different from Steam asking my birthday when opening store pages or porn sites asking “click here jf you’re 18” and take my word for it.

      So long as it’s being enforced just as well as the realName field, I maintain that it is indeed harmless. If the point is to have a hilariously ineffective solution as a fig leaf against a stupid law, I’ll prefer that to efforts to actually implement verification.

      • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I’ll believe that if and when they actually force me to upload identification to prove that my birthday really is 1970-01-01 and my name really is Nunya Bissnis

        It’ll be too late by that point. Way way way too late.

        • luciferofastora@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I doubt those changes would be PRed, merged, updated in my distro and somehow automatically pushed to my system in the blink of an eye. This isn’t Microslop we’re talking about who can force-push intransparent “fuck your settings” at the drop of a hat, and I’m certainly going to be much more wary of upcoming updates now. This isn’t my point of objection (yet - mandatory entry would be), but definitely a point of caution.

          If they stick to malicious “here, you can ask for a date, but we can’t guarantee which date, if any, you’ll get” compliance, that isn’t perfect, but it’ll be good enough to make a joke out of tracking the date at all.

          Besides, just this change being minor would be no reason not to keep pushing back against the law and airing our discontent about the direction they’re heading in, because the direction is definitely concerning.

          • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Your real name and location data have been stored in UNIX/Linux for over 60 years.

            IF you entered that info. And it wasn’t being used by applications to enable surveillance laws. It’s a false equivalency.

        • ImitationLimitation@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          “Do not comply in advance.” There is simply no need for this. Resist because it’s our duty to do so in order to keep our freedoms. Start with, “why are they doing this?” Then go follow the money. Zuckerberg and Meta, that’s why. They have been under the gun for years to protect people, especially minors, from the harms of their attention based economy of apps. They hired lobbyists in multiple states to push this legislation. Why? Because if the OS does it, they don’t have to, and can blame all the problems on the OS. What’s the Meta business model? Gather data and sell it. The more accurate and targeted the data, the higher the price. What do these laws do? Add more data. Why doesn’t Apple, Google, and Microsoft resist? They already have the infrastructure and are data gathers themselves. Why does the government allow this (US and all 5 eyes)? They LOVE surveillance.

          https://tboteproject.com/

          • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Sincerely, thank you for spelling it out to the rest of the class.

            These things are always worded ‘agreeably’ enough that by the time we’re done going back and forth debating it all day, they’ve pushed even more invasive policies on us.

    • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Lots of disingenuous comments in this thread regarding the change being “just json” considering they’re already on a warpath of implementing id verification. They are testing the water to see what they can get away with.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

      Argue against what is happening, not fictitious and hypothetical scenarios that are not happening.

      Furthermore, the Linux community has always been against shit like this (see: systemd outrage, open bios, gnu etc).

      We’ve had fields for storing way more personal information (like real name, home telephone number, location, etc) since 1962. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gecos_field

      There is nothing that a birthdate will tell about a person that their real name and location will not.

      The criticism here needs to be aimed at the laws and politicians. This article is whipping up a lynch mob against a volunteer developer using a clickbait article for the purposes of ad revenue.