• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    140
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    Nobody gives a fuck about your weaseling technicalities. The salient fact is that this change was made in order to “comply in advance” with totalitarian fuckery. It SIGNALS POLITICAL SUPPORT for it, and that’s not okay!

    • Balinares@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I studied at the PR in question and that’s not the conclusion I arrive at. Let me try to explain how this looks to me.

      Also keep in mind, I do think we absolutely need to keep the political pressure on and push back on identity-gating policies with all our collective might. In that light the PR itself does the two things I’d absolutely require here: one, it allows the user to put whatever value they want in that field, including none at all, and two, it disallows all apps from reading that field without the user’s active permission.

      Basically it’s a superficially valid implementation of a bullshit requirement that still leaves all the power in the user’s hands and therefore renders the requirement meaningless. Or in other words, a huge middle finger to the proponents of age-checking.

      Mind you, I feel there’s also value in loud non-compliance and I’m glad some are taking that road – keep it up, folks. But I’m leery of demands that only one single approach be taken. This needs to be fought on every front we can. And to me the PR in question reads like an effective defensive move.

      • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s something I wondered about the person who implemented this too, I wonder if it was an attempt to install a bare minimum to say “There. We did it. Leave us alone.” Instead of leaving it up to the government to force the issue, and he’s getting absolutely raked over the coals for it.

        If that’s the case, I feel terribly bad about this backfiring so hard on him. I do think we should be putting up a lot more resistance before resorting to something like this though.

      • Lucy :3@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        I “love” how everyone now recommends alternative/non-systemd distros, not realizing that those will have to implement exactly the same sooner or later. Systemd is just moving fast.

            • kptn_o@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              If you are an international organized collective without monetary goals - who the fuck cares about local law? What is the worst that can happen - threaten to jail a person that is using $LINUX_DISTRIBUTION?

            • terabyterex@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              us law doesnt existvputside the united states. systemd is not a corporation, its open source code.

              • Lucy :3@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                But systemd exists inside the US. What do you want, an optional field to be optional for the US? Then good news, the fucking optional field is already optional.

        • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          You do realise there are many different jurisdictions om this planet, right? Some fight back more valiant against this shit than others.

          Of course it’s still up in the air where which law will be introduced, but assuming every single distro or project has to follow the same laws is naive.