A small set of people are merging changes to various Linux components to make sure every application knows your birth date.

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@smn @artemis do you think Desktop Linux as it currently exists complies with every law in every jurisdiction? Because I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

There's already strong discussion on significant amendments on the law. The Governor signed it and pointed out is was impractical and needed to be amended.

Do you really think the AG of California is going to sue *random Linux distro with almost no money* over this?

[dalias@hachyderm.io]

@wwahammy @artemis Like seriously. Even if you weren't going to consider complying with this unthinkable, adopting something like this that's a policy matter should be a process that requires a proposal and feedback from the community, with a long enough time window for that to happen. Not rushed-through changes by shadowy actors who show up just to do what some malicious external authority demands.

[frumble@chaos.social]

@artemis @smn @wwahammy What if you are Californian? Could get you in legal trouble.

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@smn @artemis if they did do this, how do you think the AG of California could prove by a preponderance of the evidence how many children used the OS? Because you need prove that to set the fines. How would they do that for a distro that has no continuing relationship with the users?

[shadsterling@mastodon.social]

@artemis @smn @wwahammy a few have updated their licenses to exclude uses in jurisdictions with those requirements. Not sure what California could do if they caught you using an OS not licensed to use in CA, but while they might be able to punish the user they can’t touch the provider

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@ShadSterling @artemis @smn while understandable, that's not a good solution. I don't think we should trade one freedom away for another.

The whole thing needs to be stopped. Period. No compromise, no surrender.

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@frumble @artemis @smn how? Why would the AG of California just decide to sue some random person?

[artemis@climatejustice.social]

@ShadSterling @smn @wwahammy it's a nightmare. What's particular irking me rn is that the 'Freedom' brigade that have been SO vocal during the height of covid are now totally silent on draconian laws that will actually limit real freedom of speech. (surprise, surprise).

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@artemis @ShadSterling @smn I mean, they're backing it.

[drwho@masto.hackers.town]

@wwahammy Of course, the "spam" they're talking about is people signing up to tell them that this is madness.

[artemis@climatejustice.social]

@wwahammy @ShadSterling @smn we are rapidly getting to a point (some would argue past a point) where resistance, for us white folks who've had little skin in the game, is going to mean real consequences and confronting the fact that the law is an ass.

[artemis@climatejustice.social]

@wwahammy @ShadSterling @smn well yeah. Slightly different from where I sit (in Australia, having seen the 'sovereign citizens' on the socials, whining about face masks and traffic violations, rather than the political figures. They're just absent. )

[crypticrainfall@app.wafrn.net]

"It's not going to be repealed," ok, but like, can we? Can we build a plan to get this reversed? I'm about to complain on the daily to my state reps, because I sure as hell didn't ask them to pass it, and they sure as hell didn't let me know this was even in the works.

If I got backing, I'd even do the work of getting a prop going to repeal this, I'm not even joking. Or should some other options be explored first? Is anyone else taking these steps? Can anyone hear me? Where is the pushback against this?

[rootwyrm@weird.autos]

@wwahammy these are definitely not unknown people. I guarantee you every single fucking one of them is a Meta or Google employee.

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@rootwyrm as far as I know, I don't think they are.

[rootwyrm@weird.autos]

@wwahammy there's no fucking way that these commits are not directly linked to Meta and their ilk. Absolutely none at all. These are the only companies besides IBM with the staff, and the only ones with the vested interest, as well as a LONG history of hiding, minimizing, or straight up lying about their involvement in things.
If the IPs aren't from Meta's ASN, they're employees using their home connection again, something the company has ordered them to do for breaking the law for example.

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@rootwyrm sadly, I think it's mostly people who genuinely believe they're doing the right thing. They're 100% wrong.

[shadsterling@mastodon.social]

@wwahammy @artemis @smn it does, but I don’t think that license change is meant to be a whole solution, and I’m not sure what better thing those orgs could do.

Until it is stopped, maybe it would be better if the ones not located in California just ignored it; it’s not like they can impose California law on the entire world

[grayrattus@mastodon.social]

@frumble @artemis @smn @wwahammy Ok. Now I'm actually concerned of USA. Are you people there OK? Like slowly your country moves to China like spy land.

[wwahammy@social.treehouse.systems]

@grayrattus @frumble @artemis @smn no, we're fucking not. But it doesn't help that big companies are pushing these policies either.