Aaaaand to throw it all away at the end with "well when the rubber meets the road we'll comply anyway, thanks for inhaling my hot air." Take a damn stand and dare them to sue the hacker known as Linux or whatever.

▲

sahilkerkar 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'd say that anger is better directed towards the legislators in charge of creating these absurd policies, not the folks at System76. It's not reasonable to expect a company to sacrifice its entire business on a moral battlefield.

	▲	jrm4 18 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Right, but in turn it is absolutely reasonable and good for consumers to threaten a company with (legal) harm or extinction on a moral battlefield.

▲

bitwize 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Age attestation (edited) is the law now in California. Noncompliance can mean stiff penalties. If you don't like it, write your Congressman.

▲

rockskon 18 hours ago | parent [-]

*attestation, not verification

▲

gzread 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Which means an OS must have a parental controls API, and that's all if means.

▲

rockskon 11 hours ago | parent [-]

No it doesn't. It might lead to that someday, but it isn't that far yet.

▲

gzread 10 hours ago | parent [-]

That is literally what the California and Colorado laws say. Have you read them?

▲

rockskon 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Have you?

To my knowledge they require the OS to have an API for websites and services to access a determination of the age range from.

This is a far cry from the breadth of what a "parental control API" would entail even if it would be part of such a thing.

	▲	gzread 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Indeed. It's basically bool AreParentalControlsEnabled(); The way you enable them is by the root user typing a number less than 18.