• brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The source is the source: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/acb6624fa19ddd68f9433fb0838db119fe18c3ed

      Takes a birth date for the user in ISO 8601 calendar date format. The earliest representable year is 1900. If an empty string is passed the birth date is reset to unset.

      That’s it. That’s all it does.

      Whatever was discussed in the PR, the code does precisely nothing to implement any kind of verification. It’s just an optional birth date field, like tons of electronics have had forever.

      • irish_link@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t think anyone who read even the first paragraph of the article (at least the one i read) would say they are doing verification. They are simply adding a field for data to be housed if anyone wants to opt in. Instead of putting it in 20 different spots/apps it’s in one place that any third party can reference.

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          So they’re introducing a system where a users age can be verified?

          No. They are not.

          It is an optional field that does no semblance of checking its veracity. Again, like basically every bit of electronics has had forever.

            • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              I just don’t see how it’s any different than my Sony PSP having an optional birthday field. Or oldschool forums having one. It can’t possibly affect me, or anyone who’s concerned about it.

              If systemd starts talking about bundling face scanners or whatever they actually need to verify someone’s age, and then tons of linux systems start requiring it, then I will be gravely concerned.

              • sonofearth@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                4 months ago

                it’s optional now but can be mandatory later? It literally takes a baby monkey’s brain to understand that.

                Also this is literally in the PR:

                Stores the user’s birth date for AGE VERIFICATION, as required by recent laws in California (AB-1043), Colorado (SB26-051), Brazil (Lei 15.211/2025), etc.

          • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            ah yeah because all of our digital clocks, smartphones, smart watches, microwaves, washing machines, TVs, and… what else stores user age in a standardized manner? oh, you say none of these and no other things either?