- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Some of you need to watch this video, and hang your head in shame.
Dylan Taylor has been receiving constant harassment, including threats to his life and safety, for actions done collectively by SystemD. The article by Sam Bent was explictly mentioned as part of the harassment campaign, and rightfully so.
I don’t think enough people realize that this is catastrophically bad. It’ll discourage people from becoming open source developers, it’ll discourage people from using Linux, and it’ll discourage legislators from taking the Linux community seriously.
If you ever wished ill upon another human being for complying with a relatively inconsequential law, you are better off never touching a computer again. The Linux community has collectively gone so far beyond what is acceptable here.
You must log in or # to comment.
I’m going to bullet my thoughts on this whole thing because I’m annoyed by the general response, and the implementation as well:
- I don’t wish harm on the dev and I don’t dislike them. I don’t even know them
- Death threats are ridiculous; that’s the working class attacking itself again
- That said, I want to know what compelled this dev to preemptively implement this field not in 1 but in 2 separate PRs
- Both the field and the law itself do not serve the user at all; it’s a bullshit vague law that is using children as cover—again (I’m old enough to know how this game works)
- I’ve always viewed Linux as the rebel among all of the corporate slop we have to constantly dodge, so it is super gross when I see changes in Linux that were made to appease laws built and pushed by fascist tech companies and governments
- Did the dev even open a line of discussion anywhere, or was the PR supposed to be used for that?
- What’s his motivation? Money? Fame? I’ve been a programmer for 20 years and I’d never jump on a chance to add something that aligns with laws I think are unethical dog shit—especially in the Linux space where the whole goal is to not be Windows
- I’m a bit frustrated with the casual “what’s the big deal?” mindset that a lot of people I’ve encountered have about this. Are we not living through the same timeline where the US has fallen under the control of a fascist regime that is being eagerly assisted by Meta, Apple, Microsoft and a ton of other massive corporations? How do people not see that this is the beginning of the wedge? And let’s say it peters out and nothing else happens. I’m not going to be ashamed of the fact that I was a squeaky wheel over it because I’ve seen how these things go. You follow the money and suddenly the bigger picture comes into focus. Why on earth a meager single little dev would implement this, unprompted, is just beyond my reasoning.
This reminds me of when Guillermo Rauch from Vercel praised Trump multiple times. Bro, you’re not Tim Cook. You’re not Ellison, Zuck, or Musk. You’re not even on their level. You’re not going to get on their radar. I have PTSD from fellow tech folks being weirdly aligned with fascism and this whole dumb thing is giving me that vibe again. I don’t think this is that 1:1, but this is like the metal scene. You have to dodge the fascists that seem to weirdly permeate corners of the culture. People that refuse and get annoyed by right-wing labels, but still help right-wing grifters, are their own unique brand of pathetic.
What’s his motivation? Money? Fame?
Why does anybody submit changes to any project? Probably a wide variety of reasons.
I’ve been a programmer for 20 years and I’d never jump on a chance to add something that aligns with laws I think are unethical dog shit—especially in the Linux space where the whole goal is to not be Windows
I hope that you can see that there are people who see this addition as being not a big deal: optional field, no verification, GECOS fields already storing ‘realName’, ‘location’, etc.
It doesn’t seem like a huge stretch to understand why a person would submit a simple update when they don’t think it’s of world changing significance.
I’m a bit frustrated with the casual “what’s the big deal?” mindset that a lot of people I’ve encountered have about this.
I’m one of those people so maybe I can help.
Are we not living through the same timeline where the US has fallen under the control of a fascist regime that is being eagerly assisted by Meta, Apple, Microsoft and a ton of other massive corporations?
Yes, we are. That’s why I don’t use their software or services. The major, and most important, reason why this isn’t a big deal to me is that Apple, Meta and Microsoft don’t choose the software that is part of my system. We’re not in commercial software land, this is the FOSS world. Here, I get to choose what happens on my system because I am the one in completely control.
If a project decides that I have to submit to age verification then I simply won’t use their project, it’s just that simple. But, that is not what is happening here. There is no verification of any sort, nor is the operation of systemd affected by this field in ANY way.
I don’t buy the slippery slope argument that’s being presented around this topic which makes the change seem like the beginning of fascisim or the end of privacy or whatever other hyperbolic situations that people are breathlessly inventing to justify their outrage.
We already have fields to store personal data and those fields are optional and rarely used. They exist because they are needed in some cases and in the cases where they are not needed they do not do anything. The birthDate field is exactly the same as the realName field in that sense. It only does something if you choose to install software that uses it.
This field will NEVER affect you unless you choose to install software on your system that requires it.
What’s happening here is that people are treating this single JSON field as a stand-in for age verification. It is not. If someone wants to meaningfully fight age verification laws then they need to involve themselves in politics instead of social media brigading and harassment campaigns against developers.
In my view, this ‘situation’ exists because it allows hoards of people to appear to be ‘doing something’ without actually doing anything. It’s low effort activisim. People find it much easier to write self-righteous and hyperbolic comments and to get into internet fights than to do the hard work required to affect the politicians and laws that are passed.
On top of this we have the signal boosting effect of trend following, clickbait-driven sites and content creators looking to boost ad revenue by playing up outrage and drama.
I disagree with these laws, but this is not the hill where the battle is being fought. It is a pointless distraction and one that is being used to actively target a person for harm.
Nothing is going to happen on your system unless you choose to let it happen. No software update by any project will ever change this.
The only thing that will change it, and the thing that people should focus on, are the laws in the places where they live.
This field will NEVER affect you unless you choose to install software on your system that requires it.
If the field did not exist software could not be made to utilize it.
Do you think that would prevent or discourage age verification software from existing? It’s not as if a systemd user field is the only place a user’s birthday could be stored.
Realistically, age verification software that is seriously attempting age verification isn’t even going to touch the systemd field, because why would it? The field could only be trusted if it is managed by an age verification service anyway, in which case the service could just as easily store the data outside of systemd.
I’ll be upset when a cloud-connected Linux component prevents the system from working unless the real name and birth date fields have been verified
until then, this is just as inert as the real name field which has been there for decades, and far less useful for surveillance than the real name field which has been there for decades
Except this field has been implemented explicitly for this age verification laws. If this was for some random birthday greeting when you open terminal, i think fewer people would be up in arms. context is everything.
if this moron implements compliance with laws that record a birthday today, what is stopping him adding 3rd party verification of id tomorrow? So far his track record is corporate bootlicker. You cannot trust projects where this guy is a contributer to
what is stopping him
The pull request approval process? It’s quite easy to recognize that one change is harmless and another is not. The slope is not THAT slippery.
I completely understand objecting to the systemd change, I also object, but acting like the fascists have already won is a bit crazy.
It is slippery, I have described the process UK is taken here https://piefed.social/comment/10693725
Age verification laws: slippery slope. Sure. I agree.
Adding optional age field to systemd userdb: not slippery. Systemd isn’t being weaponized as an age verification suite. It’s just not happening.
No, let’s wait till we’re at the bottom of the slope. Then start objecting.
As I said, I also object, but you have to realize you’re literally just doing the slippery slope meme unironically. The part that makes it a fallacy is the unjustified assertion that more egregious changes are the inevitable result of the first one, except the first one is materially harmless and in line with existing PII fields in userdb. It’s completely reasonable to expect systemd to go no further than it already has.
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
Whats wrong with Age verification? its fine to verify age, the problem with the age verification laws is the issue of how age is being verified. In this case its fine because its local first and privacy respecting.
Its not suitable for proving your age. Its adding a field which is a stepping stone to future gating and more control over something that isn’t even applicable to most of the users of the system.
Why not then add a live filter to ensure that you don’t call Putler’s war in Ukraine and call it “SVO” as you are supposed to? Its the law over there and many years older than this one. People already have gone to prison for not complying with it. But hey lets make that a part of linux too. Its law after all… Do you see how stupid it is to blindly comply to something that doesn’t even apply to you?
How is it not suitable? If I setup my kids age and an app wants to use the portal to check if he is over 18 and it returns no. That suitable age verification and its privacy respecting. Which is what is being suggested.
Age verification requires doxxing yourself in order to actually work, and if it doesn’t require doxxing yourself then it won’t work and it can be bypassed, so pointless capitulation granting ease into more authoritarian forms in the future. You don’t see why any actually functional age verification is a problem while fascists are trying to control all the digital architecture?
No it doesnt. If I ask are you 18 and you reply no/yes that is verifying your age without doxing you. This field is for when the user is NOT admin on the machine. This field would be filled out by the parent when they’re setting up their kids machine.
What is the point of a field like this if you can literally put anything in it you want? Your not verifying anything. The next logical step is to add proof.
What is the point of a field like this if you can literally put anything in it you want? Your not verifying anything. The next logical step is to add proof.
That isn’t the next logical step for systemd, which is what this post is about.
The reason systemd stores this information is that systemd stores user information and this is user information.
If some future application comes along that wants to require age verification and use that field to store the data, then you can simply choose to not install it. Problem solved.
Removing birthDate doesn’t stop these programs from existing. If there isn’t a birthDate field then they can simply decide that they’re going to store the birthdate in the user’s ‘location’ field instead and it would work perfectly fine. Are you going to remove the location field too? All of the text fields?
Adding a specific birthDate field is simply recognizing that this software exists (which, it does) and that systemd is the logical place to store user metadata (which it is).
If you don’t like the software that will do age verification then don’t install that software.
If you’re a user that requires age verification (IE a child) then you cant just add it. Your parent will be the root user controlling your account.
Like I said, any actually FUNCTIONAL age verification. Your example verifies absolutely nothing.
How does that verify nothing? It provides perfectly fine age verification.
it would be very interesting to see that attempt
but Poettering has already said that functionality doesn’t belong in systemd so I’m not sure where anyone would raise such a PR
seems like an Ubuntu/RedHat level distribution design to pull in a brand new age-verification / mass-surveillance component, or maybe modify an existing telemetry component
the birth date field only made it into systemd because it’s user metadata that is consistent with what is already stored there, whereas surveillance does not
for now, at least
again, I’d be very interested to see what happens with follow-up PRs
Poettering closed the pr that was reverting this age field. What happens is adding more and more control in the future to conform to whatever idiotic laws someone might make. Should we then also implement a filter for what you type online to conform with Russian law about calling their war “SVO”? Its their law after all, so why not make the rest of the world conform? Its already years older then this age verification?
rejecting the revert is completely separate from accepting additional age-check / mass-surveillance PRs, you know this and you are being willfully ignorant
I would be very upset and very surprised if hypothetical follow-up PRs were merged into systemd, and I’m betting they will be rejected
How is it different? The ready acceptance of additional fields specifically for age verification is clearly proof enough that any further bullshit will be accepted just as quickly. PR description clearly outlines it is for the sole purpose of age verification…
What happens is adding more and more control in the future to conform to whatever idiotic laws someone might make.
Slippery slope
Should we then also implement a filter
Also?
There is no filter here so the comparison isn’t valid.
If we’re just playing hypotheticals, turn the situation around. What if some Russian state program was required to run on every machine and if it detected people not in compliance with the law it updated their location field to say ‘jail’. Should we then remove the location field?
Don’t collaborate with fascists.
systemd maintainers rolling over and complying in advance somehow isn’t even that surprising.
I don’t get the “complying in advance” argument here. What would be an appropriate date for something like this to be accepted?
Never. Let shit hit the fan if it has to. Fight back instead of swallowing the whole boot.
Legitimately the way various porn sites addressed similar laws is the way to go. Verification required in this state? “Well we’re no longer serving this state’s traffic at all, and conveniently here’s the contact info of the government officials to blame, enjoy!”
Hi. Are you a maintainer of one of the distros that might be affected by this law? If you aren’t then you have no standing to blindly tell them that they should not follow the law and risk fines that would ruin the funding for their project(s).
Bringing up porn sites is a false equivalency. Many of these laws do not require verification of ID or face scans as some are incorrectly claiming. They require a birthdate be entered during installation. The laws surrounding porn sites required 3rd party age verification which many of these sites said would not only crater their traffic from these states but also introduce a privacy nightmare which would also work against their business interests.
I don’t think enough people realize that this is catastrophically bad. It’ll discourage people from becoming open source developers, it’ll discourage people from using Linux, and it’ll discourage legislators from taking the Linux community seriously.
Sure, but personally, I don’t want a linux community that’s driven by corporate needs and governments that have been paid off by them. I don’t view it as a catastrophe, if that’s the version of “the linux community” that we lose.
None of that is to say that harassing devs is correct. It’s not, and never is. Harassing anyone with death threats and dogpiling is not on. But if we take that out of the picture, negative pushback that drives away devs that would otherwise have helped implement universal age gating isn’t something I’m terribly upset over, because I don’t want the version of community they’re taking us towards
this version IS the community and they’re not taking us anywhere where we weren’t already going.
linux is a much a product of our society as are other things like pop culture and capitalism. corporations of all sizes and reaches (ie red hat, ibm, google, facebook, etc.) have always steered the path and decided upon the development trends that linux has always taken and the only people who could have prevented or mitigated further centralized enshitification (aka the linux kernel developers group) bent over backwards to comply with the american government’s overreach when they kicked out russian developers.
age verification is just the next step into this overreach and it too is being driving from the same corporate/government source that forced us all to accepting things like systemd or libvirt/kvm (facebook for the former and red hat for the latter) to service their profit motives.
like american politics, it’s still possible to reverse the trend; but also like american politics; it requires a greater deal of collectivist action that westerners are unwilling to risk out of fear of losing their own tiny piece of the pie.
[the linux kernel developers group] bent over backwards to comply with the american government’s overreach when they kicked out russian developers.
I though that was mostly due to Linus being a typical Russia-hating Finn, but I never investigated.
i also wouldn’t put this past him given the reactionary tendencies he’s demonstrated in the past; but i suspect that a threat of non-compliance == treason from the federal government probably had a bigger impact.
and if you’ve ever had the displeasure of working for the federal government; you’ll hear horror stories of how capricious and draconian the selective enforcement of treason can be.
No one is forcing you to use a distro that uses systemd
Threats against a developer, no matter whether he’s a chud or not; is unacceptable, unhinged behavior. You have a remedy that isn’t harassment. Just don’t use his software
No one is forcing you
They absolutely forced the changes upon us.
You are free to switch distros
deleted by creator
“You are free to use increasingly niche technology until you’re marginalized out of existence or give in and lick the boot”
actions done collectively by SystemD
Nope. It only needs one maintainer to do the PR
It’ll discourage people from becoming open source developers
You know what will discourage Them more? Id verification
relatively inconsequential law
Give me your Id. Seriously, go and give me your ID with nothing blurred.
Give me your Id. Seriously, go and give me your ID with nothing blurred.
My age is 26.
That’s not what they asked
I also want to see your passport and your original birth certificate
That’s not what they asked
Wrong. That is all that is asked in the Californian legislation.
deleted by creator
That’s not what they asked
Yes, I know. I answered the question that reasonably follows from the context. Not their loaded question that assumes something which was not in the pull request.
I know a lot of people like to use the slippery slope fallacy here but even if that applies, you should limit your resistance to points where you actually have a leg to stand on. It’s not like the government would find it much harder to jump straight to age verification without this age indication step. Going all-in now just does all manner of a disservice to the cause of digital privacy.
deleted by creator
We’ll deal with that when it happens. Not fighting against an imagined threat by using the slippery slope fallacy.
Start by fighting the New York one.
deleted by creator
100% agree.
P. S. Keep the downvotes coming. You only prove the point of the post with your toxicity.
It’s really a toxic community.
Common right wing pattern:
- I do a fascist thing
- people call me a piece of shit
- I feel threatened
Replies like these are toxic as fuck.
