Hacker News Reader

Comment by DoctorOetker | Hacker News Reader

nobody is worried about about the arbitrarian aspects?

What if you are interested in developing your own OS (a task that would have been monumental but may become trivial with LLMs in the future)?

Why is the proper level the OS? Why not the browser or the hypervisor?

Or perhaps manufacturer should remember your age? What if hardware is resold? We would need a hardware cadastre! A global hardware cadastre would unite all jurisdictions in a power bloc eventually. It starts with daily computer/laptop, then domotics, then digital door locks, and before you know it the bloc-global hardware cadastre becomes authoritative, and the reference for property ownership.

Is there even a proper level?

View on HN

The bill doesn't exempt Linux-based systems by name, if that's what you're thinking. It exempts any operating system that allows users to "copy, redistribute, and modify the software". It's a bit arbitrary in the sense that Microsoft and Apple could dodge the requirement by simply becoming open source, but that's not going to happen so it's not really a problem.

At the risk of sounding off-topic, there is other legislation distinguishing OS which contain an individualized app store from those which do not. Maybe Facebook Under 13, Facebook Teen, and Facebook Adult should be different apps.

Colorado legislation, for example, won’t change if the OS license changes.

> It's a bit arbitrary in the sense that Microsoft and Apple could dodge the requirement by simply becoming open source, but that's not going to happen so it's not really a problem.

Considering macOS is already built on an OSS kernel (Darwin), and that Apple no longer charges any money for OS upgrades, I could imagine a world where Apple just shuffles some components around and announces macOS is now fully open source. Just so happens to require a lot of Apple chips with proprietary firmware, but hey that's for security reasons. Trusted enclave and all that. Nothing to see here. We'll take the exemptions for FOSS now please.

(Of course the real reason Apple won't do this is that they already have almost all of their user's ages via Apple ID, and being a trusted age-auth intermediary actually plays to their core strengths really well.)

Yeah, they're just digging a hole of bad laws.

The proper level is actually the device. The government doesn't care about how you arbitrarily divide the device software into components - only how they are non-arbitrarily provided by different people.

I disagree. The proper thing is to not have this at all in any shape or form.

So the proper thing to do is show hardcore porn to little kids? That's your take?

The proper thing is to strictly outlaw kids using the internet. There is nothing of value for kids on the internet, and even if there were, there are technical means of allowing users to use applications without generalized and ungated internet access, for instance roblox could be distributed through an age vetted app (including vetting adults too), the app could get internet access but disallow general internet browsing to arbitrary hosts.

I'm confused. Parental controls for internet use have been around for decades.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com