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.
So they’re introducing a system where a users age can be verified?
Hmm, if only there was a name for that.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
The source is the source: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/acb6624fa19ddd68f9433fb0838db119fe18c3ed
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.
So they’re introducing a system where a users age can be verified?
Hmm, if only there was a name for that.
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40954
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.
It is literally for the act of verifying a users age.
Being the verifier instead of the requester doesn’t make it not age verification. It’s part and parcel.
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.
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:
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?
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.
(Time to set it to) literally 1984!
You can if you want
You also could just ignoro it entirely as it is optional