- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Add a required birth date prompt (YYYY-MM-DD) to the user creation flow, stored as a systemd userdb JSON drop-in at /etc/userdb/<user>.user on the target system.
Motivation
Recent age verification laws in California (AB-1043), Colorado (SB26-051), Brazil (Lei 15.211/2025), etc. require platforms to verify user age. Collecting birth date at install time ensures Arch Linux is compliant with these regulations.
This is just a pull request, no changes yet.
The pull-request discussion thread has been locked, just like it happened for the similar thread in Systemd, owing to the amount of negative comments…
You must log in or # to comment.
This dude need to chill, he also pushed the systemd change, and in his blog he seems to believe android “advance flow” for sideloading protects users.
The one they are targeting is California’s AB-1043, which still have three quarters of a year before it comes into effect…
I think this dude might get too excited for his new subscription of claude code or whatever, and decided to spam every project with these request. Some of these are reasonable, some are compliance in advance.
Also this dude writes two freaking blog every week with LLM. If I were him, I would try to find some joy in my personal life…
are you sure it’s even a person, not a bot? because this all screams either bot or seeking internet fame as the “hero to kids”.
I think he has repo pre ChatGPT with legitimate usecases, while that would not be a conclusive proof, I cannot imagine some chatbot would bother with this.
Yeah. He’s also the third highest contributor to archinstall. But even good developers can have shit beliefs.
“hero to kids”
tool of big baron.
I think Brodie Robertson interviewed them.
I fully expect this person to not be even real and instead just another ai bot to push agenda for corporate scum
He’s the third highest contributor to archinstall.
https://github.com/dylanmtaylor
Still a dipshit but probably not a bot.
it’s so strange to me that he tried to add age verification scripting changes in archinstall. isn’t that the wrong place systemd makes sense but I’m puzzled by the archinstall pr
The thing that’s frustrating is that if the age verification laws weren’t there and they wanted to add a birthday field it wouldn’t seem bad. Details about the human using the account like first and last name are already stored. All you really need is username. But because it’s explicitly in reaction to age verification laws we have to be skeptical about adding it.
@JackbyDev @underscores Yes we do, because it is an erosion of our freedom.
You’re saying that in a post age verification world though, my whole point is that if this were there before it wouldn’t seem bad. I’m not saying we should add it now because it would’ve been fine before.
The timing makes me even more suspicious. Of all the times one could added this field, this is probably singularly the worst one. Right after discussions of mandatory age check? Seriously?
You don’t need to be suspicious, they’re explicitly adding it because of that. They said as much. Look at what they wrote under “Motivation.”
I sort of get the feeling of something more than just complying with the possible future age verification law. I feel like it has intent do damage and distrupt the community.
Not the wrong place if you want to comply with the law, as he explains in the PR comments, the law requires the installer to prompt for age when creating users.
Fair enough that’s pretty surprising, so even Arch is not safe from lunatics… That is disappointing. As a Manjaro user, I am likely to pick up their changes via both systemd and since Manjaro is Arch based… Sad and disappointed by useful morons who have no fucking clue.
Never comply with advance. Nazi wants that. Make them fight for it. Let them sue, and get community funding for the case, and then delay the court case again and again, and maybe comply when they lose.
If you comply with advance, you are actively helping them, along with creating fear.
the law wouldn’t hold up in court anyway. its not practical for any ecosystem outside online sites.
accounts and users are the same thing, despite what the law says. it also doesn’t different a person from a user, meaning a compromised system that is complying with the law, its actions represent the user, and the account holder is held responsible.
its made to absolve meta/Microsoft/google from their actions in targeting kids with intentionally addictive content and making the “account holder” at fault.
there’s so much shit to implement in linux, new shit to make, old shit to fix. preemptively adding this bullshit, without anyone even threatening any meaningful action, should be shot down in flames and this joker excluded from any and all FOSS avenues on account of spam and trolling.
I am sure the tali-fucking-ban are tali-fucking-banning women from using the computers by way of whatever passes for laws over there. is this bootlicker gonna implement “just a JSON field” to that end as well?
grow a spine, you corpo-fetishizing cowards. where’s the “fuck you, make me” attitude? what, california of all places is gonna ban linux? fucking lol.
Please don’t make me switch distro :(
Discussion?
Yeah. That’s not what’s happening.
Censoring dissent, is what I hear is happening.
The ending content is pretty level-headed about this. Basically, “wait for a legal consult/directives from Arch Linux before implementing anything.” That seems like the most prudent thing to do.
Hopefully, the legal opinion is that this is unconstitutional, and that a conglomerate of nonprofits will collectively agree to fight this in court if any of them are sued over ignoring stupid laws.
deleted by creator
I thought that the law hasn’t even passed yet? Why are distros so eager to show legislators that they’re on board for being regulated?
The only one apparently eager to implement this is the dylanmtaylor Github user, who has created PR’s for systemd, archinstall, and Ubuntu. Maybe more.
The California bill was approved and signed into law back in October:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043
Its only one state, the rest of the world for now still have some fucking sense. If anything its disproportionate to appease a local government with global systems, whats next? Appease North Korea? Or Putin? Block Linux from working in Ukraine? How fucking insane is this dipshit to add changes to a global product for a thing that affects only 40m people out of fucking billions?
Brazil has something similar. Other US states are working on it. And the UK, some EU countries, Australia and others are pushing for the same. This won’t be just California for long: it’s a worldwide push to make it impossible to do anything involving a computer without first disclosing your real identity to the authorities.
https://www.tomsguide.com/computing/vpns/online-age-verification-a-complete-global-timeline
But hasn’t taken effect yet:
This bill, beginning January 1, 2027, would require, […]
Gentoo/Artix
I’ve started updating my own Arch install script to work with Artix instead. Hopefully have it done in a few days.
Yes, this is the way. Big ups.
What does he mean by required? This law would apply to a tiny fraction of users - no one in my continent for example. I hope he understands there’s no way it should be required for everyone.
This law affects exactly 0 users on my entire content… So why do I need this nonsense? Even systemd change is bullshit and doesn’t affect me or anyone on my continent.
Ok, so the systemd change was acceptable (since it was optional), this is absolutely not. Fuck this shit. If it’s coming to NixOS I’m going to do everything I can to stop it, and otherwise I’m keeping a Nixpkgs patch that reverts the commit
