For those interested on the question of age verification and GNU/Linux: be aware that Systemd v261-rc1 was recently released. It now implements an optional birth date field in the JSON user database (see second item under “Other changes”).
The implementation of this field was prompted by age-verification or -attestation laws.
There are genuinely useful use cases for it, and unlike what you suggest it is completely harmless.
Is everyone ignoring the direct quote in the orginal post that is referring to laws (California (AB-1043), Colorado (SB26-051), Brazil (Lei 15.211/2025)) that are going to force you to verify your age?
No; I think these bills are terrible and should be resisted. But the outrage about (what is effectively) a database on your pc to store information that itself doesn’t do anything is ridiculous.
If abyone wants or needs to implement a system like that (could be for work,for example), that’s perfectly fine. What isn’t fine is the existence of the laws in the first place, and they shouldn’t be resisted with (just) technology.
I get what you’re saying, but I think the strong objection is that implementing this now, right when these BS laws are being put into place, goes against one of the fundamental principles that Linux is built on. And doing this is a willful action toward capitulating to Big Brother - because we all know this doesn’t stop with just put your b-day in and we will just trust you. This is a stepping stone toward more and more control and verified ID. Any part of the Linux community that does not openly defy this and stand against it will invariably be looked at as traitorous and collaborator. And if you take a moment and think about what this community stands for (yes, there’s a philosophy it’s not just software; there are very distinct ethical principles represented by Linux, regardless whether you dismiss this or not), it’s clear that this adding of the field now, to accommodate this Big Brother shit, is dispicable in the extreme.
So you support adding a field for your SSN too? It’s just going to be stored in a database on your PC so why not??
Yeah, and I’m never going to use it, just like I don’t use any of the other existing fields - it doesn’t matter.
Yeah? I don’t use most of the boxes, that one would also remain blank just like the age box.
The California law does not require verification. Only attestation.
For now…
Not invested enough to be for or against it personally; just curious…
What are the user-beneficial use cases for it?
I could imagine a parental control setup using this information, for example. Linux is really behind in this regard and it’s time it started catching up IMO.
That makes sense. Papa having control over what junior sees is probably not very functionally different from Big Brother having control over what an individual sees, lol