I'm not really focused on the exact wording of this bill. But mandating distros have a useradd and glibc with an extra couple functions is not a significant burden.
I'm not really focused on the exact wording of this bill. But mandating distros have a useradd and glibc with an extra couple functions is not a significant burden.
So... a pinky swear then, right?
I mean, how is the OS going to actually verify the age of the operator?
I see how this helps Facebook - if you lie to the OS, and the OS tells Facebook that you're over 18, then it's not Facebook's fault if they provide you an 18+ service.
I don't see how this helps anyone else.
It's set by the administrator of the computer, so a parent can set it for their child instead of hoping their child is honest to every single individual site.
That's the difference between a parental control and a pinky swear.
> It's set by the administrator of the computer, so a parent can set it for their child instead of hoping their child is honest to every single individual site.
You are assuming the parent is the administrator of the computer.
I am not assuming that. That's why it's a "can". Parental controls are always "can".
I have no experience with minors using Linux. Do they not typically have sudo access?