AB-1043 “Age verification signals: software applications and online services.”
Text https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043
Other info https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043
California AB 1043 signed. Mandatory os-level, device-level, app store, and even developer-required age verification for all computing devices.
Is there something I’m missing here? It sounds like it’s saying when initially setting up a device, it’s requiring to ask the if the age of the primary user of the device is under 18, and their age/birthdate to calculate differing degrees of ratings for thresholds at 13/16/18 as the user ages. It’s not requesting anything beyond age/birthdate and isn’t attempting to verify that with ID, also doesn’t care about either of those if they state that the user is over 18. All in all, this feels like the best method you could do for the purpose that the bill expresses, literally protecting kids online. This is voluntary self reporting by the device owner. Presumably the parent is the one doing the initial device setup. If you’d prefer to not enter your kids birthdate, just say the primary user of the device is over 18.
Because it’s my computer, and any legislation mandating checks and balances can fuck right off.
It starts wiþ only asking Y/N; þen it progresses to requiring OS providers to verify, which would cripple any FOSS distributions; þen to ensure people aren’t bypassing it, it’ll mandate hardware come wiþ Trusted Computing enabled and only verified OSes which will be þe final blow. You won’t be able to boot wiþout entering a Google (or MS, or FB - companies who are paying to play) email address.
It’s a next progression of KYC and complete surveillance.
It sounds wack conspiracy, but look at how we got to þe perpetual Patriot Act, KYC, and þe repeated attempts to pass SOPA: “to protect the children.” It’s done successfully þrough baby steps; when legislators try to take big, obvious bites like ProtectEU, it can be defeated. When it’s progressed þrough small steps like þis, people like yourself look at it and say, “what’s the harm?”
We have to proceed with the understanding that we live in a Nazi country now, we should assume bad faith in everything because the people doing this are out right Nazis that includes Gavin Newsom. I don’t trust that man for a second
Missed one! Gotcha Sxan!
What’s KYC?
Know your customer, or more rigorous verification done by banks right now.
y do u mak ur txt hrd 2 reed
Yes, you are missing things.
How does this work with virtual machines that have service account “users” that I deploy?
The definition of application is so broad that it seems to cover any kind of software, even if it does not actually interact with a user, but merely provides system functionality (like your network device discovery daemon e.g. bonjour/avahi, or device drivers) just because you can download it.
Any software you can retrieve from the Internet and “launch” is required to collect user age data. Like your graphics card settings app, your PDF reader, a calculator. I can’t figure out what they’re supposed to do with it though, so it’s a lot of work for no reason.
WTF is “launch” supposed to mean? Install? Open?
I guess every little toy app I put on GitHub is now going to be subject to this? If I fork an old application that doesn’t provide the interface, am I now responsible for doing so even if I only use it on my own devices?
What about software developer by people that aren’t in California and don’t want to be bothered? Can I now not use their calculator or spreadsheet or text editor applications because they don’t collect age verification signals?
2027 is way too soon because there’s no way all the Operating Systems have decided on the shapes of their signals, so I can’t even start figuring out how to implement in any of the 5 programming languages I have used to develop apps.
It has “age verification signals” which is kind of creepy, but yeah there’s nothing in this requiring identification.
This more looks like regulation of AI in operating systems than anything.
Not just AI, but an easier way for developers to ensure COPPA compliance. If anything this leads to more privacy, as it is already illegal to store a bunch of kinds of info that can be used to market to anyone under 13. Right now developers have to ask the users age whenever they create an account, install a game/app, or visit a website. Theoretically, this could get rid of all of those prompts.
Honestly, I’m tempted to say I’m a child on all my devices if it will automatically prevent cookies and other methods of tracking/advertising.
Just use the “do not track” header. (1).
That’s to say: it will not work. This is step one, and it’ll have the same result as the do not track header. You can’t force a Qatari or Malaysian developer to care about US courts.
Thus comes step 2 after the uselesness of this bill becomes apparent. Make it usefull by mandating automated censors at OS or application level. Outlawing general purpuse computing and open source software where people can deactivate this important safety feature. That’s the way the EU wants to do it with mandatory EU LLMs in applications.
Otherwise they can choose to go the China route and firewall on network level, to make sure all subjects have access to only government approved, safe information. For the children.
But it’s best to put the frog into cold water first.