This is horribly vague.
>a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.
It leaves open to interpretation if it applies to all computers, or just general purpose ones.
Does a car count as a mobile device?
>a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.
It leaves open to interpretation if it applies to all computers, or just general purpose ones.
Does a car count as a mobile device?
Going to be fun when my washing machine asks me to upload a scan of my passport to the CIA before it will open the door.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FkK8ZFE7Y0
The CIA hates that trick.
That puts me for the rest of my life at a level of fuck you.
And if the system breaks down, I’m just going to hunt and eat you. How big do you think your chance of survival is meeting someone hungry who spent over a decade in war and conflict zones and is still here?
I’m more concerned about the future for your sake than for mine.
Oh, AGI can turn everyone into matchsticks, but when I talk about turning humans into tasty sausage the internet goes wild.
It’s obviously sarcasm, just for the neurodivergent talent in here panic buying cannibalism safe bunkers now.
/s
I'm adapted to the American diet, so I'm sure that they'll cover my nutritional needs.
Let's stay on opposite sides of the pond like Godzilla and King Kong.
I like you whisky.
That’s a deal I can get behind.
I will send your administration a request to put your statue on top of the Arc de Trump. If they can pay 400 million for a ballroom, they can spend one for a diamond statue of the man that saved a lot of American lives today.
True heroes don’t always wear capes. Sometimes they have butcher knife’s.
https://health.yahoo.com/wellness/nutrition/articles/ultrapr...
Wait, 27% for the right-wing extremists in Germany? The strongest party if there were elections today? Some of them publicly state they are the friendly faces of facism?
Oh, oh. I’m in danger.
Arrogance is usually a defense mechanism that you can't fix with logic... people use it to shield themselves from their own insecurities so they don't feel inadequate or threatened.
If you can't see your own flaws, you can't understand why others don't like your behavior.
"As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding."
Oh stop it. You’re breathtaking!
Know what gave it away?
> enough in the bank at three to five percent
I mean lol if he’s expecting banks to be around in a societal collapse situation he’s got another thing coming, wonder how the shitbox car will do when fuel runs out in 8 weeks worldwide. Mad max baby!
That's not even the worst part:
> a person that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system
Suppose you write a generic piece of code that some third party then includes in an operating system, but you're the only relevant person in the jurisdiction. Are you now an "operating system provider"? If the "operating system" is made by hundreds of people or more, is it none of them or all of them or what?
Suppose you're a company and you've got a bunch of servers, which are computers, and you have root on them, i.e. you "control" the "operating system".
For example in the Linux world, it's the distributions.
Where it gets murky is with Android (and to a lesser extent Windows).
IMHO, the entities which should be responsible are Google and Microsoft.
But since vendors, specially in the Android world, can heavily tweak the OS, there is a case that it's more the device manufacturers like Samsung which are responsible.
The relevant interpretation in practice will usually happen naturally, and the most ambiguous stuff will be set by jurisprudence if necessary.
So let's say someone in e.g. South America publishes an Android ROM. >99% of the code was written by Google but the author isn't using Google Play or any form of Google service for updates, it's only using the base Android code with their own updater.
If someone in California uses this ROM and the person in the other jurisdiction made modifications so that it doesn't comply with this law, who is in trouble? It's pretty unreasonable to claim that it's Google, but then is it no one, since the party responsible is outside the jurisdiction?
I would argue it falls more on a case like the Linux distributions one and the guy in South America is responsible.
Google, in my opinion, can be held accountable for Android because they deeply control the ecosystem (App Store, APIs, Services) and de-facto prevents significant modifications, specially when they deal with Android security framework & mechanisms (if you modify this stuff too deeply, the Apps could break).
But if a distribution cuts ties with that, then it's the author or the entity behind it who is responsible, and if it's deemed illegal, downloading his ROM should be blocked in the US.
In truth, if I were a defender of this law (which I'm not), I would not worry too much about it. This text is here to force mainstream OS vendors to provide an API for age verification. The micro-subset of people flashing custom roms onto their phone or recompiling a piece of OSS software with some flag disabled is in practice so small that it's not really an issue.
While I do agree that this law could be better written, properly categorizing in it the cases of MS, Apple, Google and maybe entities like Linux Distribution honestly is kind of a nightmare.
Does my laptop have to pass my age verification to a Docker container?
Am I at risk of government censorship (or worse) if I create a hobby smart home app that boots bare metal on a Raspberry Pi?
Or even the shell apps that I run daily. Does curl (which can access any web url) have to validate my age? What about AI models/ollama?
It has an OS, a network stack, an interpreter. Usually used for games as much as for classwork.
A car houses numerous Turing-complete computation systems.