Which seems like a silly accidental overreach of the law. If that is the way it applies.

The literal reading of the law says this only required when a child is the primary user of the device.

> (b) (1) A developer shall request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched.

but 'user' here is:

> (i) “User” means a child that is the primary user of the device.

So these rules should only apply to accounts/devices where a child is the primary user.

Grep on an adult's machine would not need to check how old you are, at least with a literal reading of the law.

▲

frshgts 4 hours ago | parent [-]

How else but the signal could it determine whether the user is an adult or not?

	▲	singron an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The whole point of the bill is to create a cause of action for the Attorney General to sue companies. In the bill, they say the damages are up to $2,500 per negligently affected child ($7,500 if intentional), so it doesn't matter how many non-children it affects. E.g. if the OS/appstore/accounts/application is in the context of a workplace that only employs adults, none of this matters.
	▲	davorak 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I do not think the law provides guidance here. The signal is only required when children are the primary device/account users. So one model would be any initial account set up is automatically considered the 'account holder' and not a child account. Then it would be prerogative of the 'account holder' to set up child accounts or not. That seems to fit into the spirt and literal parts of the law. So grep/ls/etc are all installed as part of that 'account holder' and do not need to do any age verification. The signal only needs to be checked when the device/account user is a child and when downloading apps. I think an unfortunate consequence here is that the literal definition of the law says package managers probably can not run on children accounts without jumping through a bunch of hoops. Which is bad for children learning code/computers/etc. The first thing I would change about this law would be: > (b) (1) A developer shall request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. Any application that does not need to know a users age should not be required request the 'signal'