I've been kinda wanting to make a topic here like this for a bit now mainly because of the California and Colorado age verification laws, and I've been wanting to see you all's opinion on the matter as well. For me, even though I'm not Californian or Coloradan, I still think its stupid that politicians even gave out this horrendous idea for "age verification". Like why OS level, what's the point? I already know about 5 states actively wanting laws like this put in place or putting them in place right now: California, Colorado, Texas, Michigan, and New York (thank god I live in none of those states). But seriously, do these politicians (especially Gavin Newsom of California) not know how computers work, or even parental controls for that matter? You can't just make an operating system (like Arch Linux, the OS I use) have age verification immediately, the end user CAN add parental controls to the computer though, in case if they don't want an irresponsible child goofing around, so there's no point into ANY of these laws. Not only is there no point to these laws, it's a HUGE security risk. What if someone's data gets leaked and what if they're a child? At this point, I don't even know what to say anymore about crap like this. If Gavin Newsom wouldn't have thought about laws like this, we wouldn't have been in a situation like this. (no offense to Californians though, y'all are cool). Anyways, that's all I have to say. Hopefully this stuff doesn't extend any farther.
Don't talk to me until I've had my god damn sugar.
Amateur TASer
Main OS right now is Artix
Joined: 8/14/2025
Posts: 48
Location: The Pridelands 🦁
as a brazillian i agree, a law popurplaly called ”Lei Felca” has similar OS Level age verification requirements and it is raising concerns about what will happen to Linux and other open source apps.
This is just my personal opinion, but I suspect that age verification in reality only pretends to be for the safety of children, but actually is a way to control us. However, I have to agree that it makes no sense, and that we already have parental controls for this purpose. I don’t think age verification will affect TASVideos, and that we won’t be forced to implement it for this site as well.
as a brazillian i agree, a law popurplaly called ”Lei Felca” has similar OS Level age verification requirements and it is raising concerns about what will happen to Linux and other open source apps.
Yeah, I've heard about Brazil's laws too and they seem a whole lot worse than the laws in certain states in the country where I live right now too. From what I remember, I think Brazil was actually the first country to enact laws like that. It's honestly so stupid.
Don't talk to me until I've had my god damn sugar.
Amateur TASer
Main OS right now is Artix
This is just my personal opinion, but I suspect that age verification in reality only pretends to be for the safety of children, but actually is a way to control us. However, I have to agree that it makes no sense, and that we already have parental controls for this purpose. I don’t think age verification will affect TASVideos, and that we won’t be forced to implement it for this site as well.
They do make it seem that way, but it really isn't for "protecting the kids" they so say. It definitely is a way to control us. The fact that people on both sides on the political spectrum agree with these BS laws boggles me, this is probably the first time I've seen both sides agree on something so major. We're people and we can do what we want, when we want. That's what stupid politicians like Gavin Newsom and Matt Ball (of California and Colorado) need to understand.
Don't talk to me until I've had my god damn sugar.
Amateur TASer
Main OS right now is Artix
You can't just make an operating system (like Arch Linux, the OS I use) have age verification immediately.
That's why the laws don't take effect immediately on being passed, there is time before OSes implement this. Even then, desktop Linux isn't really the main target, Windows/macOS/Android/iOS are (and states don't exactly have much power to enforce these laws on like desktop Linux since they can only regulate intrastate commerce, as opposed to the OSes listed before as they most likely have some company presence within the state, especially California). Also, even then, desktop Linux is implementing this anyways.
Stockiel wrote:
Not only is there no point to these laws, it's a HUGE security risk. What if someone's data gets leaked and what if they're a child?
Data leaked from where exactly? The local computer being pwned? If you didn't realize, there's way more important/valuable things on your computer that can be accessed instead of the user's self-reported age (and those things are what malware will aim for), so this doesn't really change the status quo in that way?
Stockiel wrote:
If Gavin Newsom wouldn't have thought about laws like this.
I think you're putting too much credit to Gavin Newsom for this law.
Don't get me wrong, I do not like Newsom (and I like that he is term limited here), but it's not Newsom coming up with the law and proceeding to roll it out everywhere. The source is rather tech lobbyists who proceed to back this kind of age verification, then most politicans falling for it (like in California, it was unanimous in the State Assembly and State Senate). The reasons for the tech lobby to advocate this can come down to multiple factors:
1. It can be used as a way to satisfy the crowd of people who want to "make tech companies accountable" (without actually doing so).
2. It allows tech companies to easily some kind of age info for data collection purposes (although the law under ideal circumstances only has age brackets available (e.g. every adult and child lying about their age will just report 18+), and again this is self-reported age anyways)
3. It can easily charm dumb politicans who see this as "common sense" as it puts the onus of age verification at a single source instead of shoving it onto "adult websites."
1. also is great for politicans who see this as the lesser of the two evils, if age verification is going to be forced down our throats, might as well be the one which is effectively checking the "I am 18+" checkbox once on the OS and not giving ID to every possibly adult website.
You can't just make an operating system (like Arch Linux, the OS I use) have age verification immediately.
That's why the laws don't take effect immediately on being passed, there is time before OSes implement this. Even then, desktop Linux isn't really the main target, Windows/macOS/Android/iOS are (and states don't exactly have much power to enforce these laws on like desktop Linux since they can only regulate intrastate commerce, as opposed to the OSes listed before as they most likely have some company presence within the state, especially California).
Stockiel wrote:
Not only is there no point to these laws, it's a HUGE security risk. What if someone's data gets leaked and what if they're a child?
Data leaked from where exactly? The local computer being pwned? If you didn't realize, there's way more important/valuable things on your computer that can be accessed instead of the user's self-reported age (and those things are what malware will aim for), so this doesn't really change the status quo in that way?
Stockiel wrote:
If Gavin Newsom wouldn't have thought about laws like this.
I think you're putting too much credit to Gavin Newsom for this law.
Don't get me wrong, I do not like Newsom (and I like that he is term limited here), but it's not Newsom coming up with the law and proceeding to roll it out everywhere. The source is rather tech lobbyists who proceed to back this kind of age verification, then most politicans falling for it (like in California, it was unanimous in the State Assembly and State Senate). The reasons for the tech lobby to advocate this can come down to multiple factors:
1. It can be used as a way to satisfy the crowd of people who want to "make tech companies accountable" (without actually doing so).
2. It allows tech companies to easily some kind of age info for data collection purposes (although the law under ideal circumstances only has age brackets available (e.g. every adult and child lying about their age will just report 18+), and again this is self-reported age anyways)
3. It can easily charm dumb politicans who see this as "common sense" as it puts the onus of age verification at a single source instead of shoving it onto "adult websites."
1. also is great for politicans who see this as the lesser of the two evils, if age verification is going to be forced down our throats, might as well be the one which is effectively checking the "I am 18+" checkbox once on the OS and not giving ID to every possibly adult website.
Not gonna lie, reading your post after reading mine, I can see where you're coming from. Seeing as major tech dudes (CEOs, and some other people in charge of huge tech companies like Apple and Microsoft) are of course in control of most of the the tech industry, it probably is true that they originally came up with the idea, and not politicians directly. I also didn't specify where the data would be leaked from where I said it would be a huge security risk, but yes, the data from the computer being pwned specifically is what I meant (also yes, I do realize there are more important valuables on a PC than just the age of a user). But if a computer were to get pwned at that time of the law being enforced or after, and if law enforcement were to find out the user was a child, they would probably be fined (about point 2 from you: you are right about people lying about their age most likely will show up as 18+ (since that's what they're most likely going for) and will be able to access the computer fully, but it is stored on the main system, so there are still chances of getting caught. In states like Texas though, you need an ID to verify, and if you don't have an ID or refuse to scan one, you probably won't get access to your computer (in an 18+ or free manner that is). I know I might not be describing this in great detail but I'm trying my best here.
Also, with you saying desktop Linux is implementing age verification, some are and some aren't. There are ones fine with it, like Ubuntu and Fedora, but there's ones that are against it like Gentoo, not even bothering to add it into OpenRC. (that's all for me to say about the desktop Linux stuff though)
I'mma also get to point number 1 on the very first paragraph of points, I do agree that it can be used satisfy people who want to make tech companies "accountable", which in my mind, isn't even the point of the law itself. But at this point, I don't even know what to say anymore. I'mma just leave it here.
Don't talk to me until I've had my god damn sugar.
Amateur TASer
Main OS right now is Artix
I suspect that age verification in reality only pretends to be for the safety of children, but actually is a way to control us.
I agree with you. There may be some politicians who truly believe that this can protect children from whatever-they-fear, but I think that those are a minority. That protection is the responsibility of parents, not of the government. I think that more of the politicians who voted for this eventually hope to use it as a way of restricting access to whatever-they-don't-like. Then there are politicians who may not even care but may have voted for age verification in order to look good with voters and/or with lobbyists (CasualPokePlayer's point 3).
Stockiel wrote:
In states like Texas though, you need an ID to verify, and if you don't have an ID or refuse to scan one, you probably won't get access to your computer (in an 18+ or free manner that is).
That's another factor in all of this foolishness. Are OS creators really going to implement 100 different versions of age verification in order to cover all of the variability in laws from different states and countries? I doubt it. Unless a law explicitly prohibits it, they'll implement the most invasive version everywhere and call it a day.
also it's for actual age verification, like having to scan an ID
(1) Require any user of the operating system to provide the
date of birth of the user in order to--
(A) set up an account on the operating system; and
(B) use the operating system.
Seems it only requires the user to provide their date of birth. This would be massively more acceptable than sites/apps using private companies that really do scan our faces or IDs. However, it looks like we'd have to wait for the Commission to actually come up with rules on how this should be performed before we'd know what's expected.
It's also not clear how enforceable this would actually be for free OSes.
also it's for actual age verification, like having to scan an ID
(1) Require any user of the operating system to provide the
date of birth of the user in order to--
(A) set up an account on the operating system; and
(B) use the operating system.
Seems it only requires the user to provide their date of birth. This would be massively more acceptable than sites/apps using private companies that really do scan our faces or IDs. However, it looks like we'd have to wait for the Commission to actually come up with rules on how this should be performed before we'd know what's expected.
It's also not clear how enforceable this would actually be for free OSes.
Yeah, I didn't really read some of the laws fully. There's some that require IDs, and some that only require attestation. Doesn't matter though, it's still BS either way.
Don't talk to me until I've had my god damn sugar.
Amateur TASer
Main OS right now is Artix
