You are aware that the law applies to Linux desktops and will likely be included in a system update soon?

the law in the UK doesn't require any of that. It didn't even required Apple to do it. Ofcom is praising Apple for doing it even though it was not required. Social Networks need to do it.

▲

dgxyz a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You do realise I am free to modify it or pick a distribution so that isn't the case too?

▲

pfraze a day ago | parent [-]

How long till that’s illegal?

This situation is being treated like a bad business decision. It’s not. It’s a new set of laws. It’s bigger than just Apple.

▲

theandrewbailey a day ago | parent | next [-]

That depends on if you live in a jurisdiction that lives or dies by free speech, and if it considers code speech[0]. Forcing you to implement age verification is effectively forcing you to speak things you don't want to say, which isn't free speech.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junger_v._Daley

▲

hedora a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not really bigger than Apple. They could just say "no", and the UK could just go offline until they fixed their laws.

	▲	pfraze a day ago \| parent [-]
		Pretty sure it’s California that’s got the OS law

▲

dgxyz a day ago | parent | prev [-]

You'd be surprised at how often I do illegal stuff.

▲

lern_too_spel a day ago | parent | prev [-]

This UK law does not apply to OSes. It applies to online platforms. The author ran into this problem because using the iPhone required an Apple account, which could be used for something that the law applies to, but Apple didn't want to implement lazy verification and instead required verification up front.