[frshgts]

The definitions of the terms are completely bananas

The language is so broad it seems to cover all software that exists and is accessible via the internet, and every install of an operating system on any kind of machine

> (c) “Application” means a software application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application.

> “Covered application store” means a publicly available internet website, software application, online service, or platform that distributes and facilitates the download of applications from third-party developers to users of a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing that can access a covered application store or can download an application.

> “Operating system provider” means a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.

So any piece of software you can download from the internet will be required to check this "signal" made available by the os?

[general1465]

> “Covered application store” means a publicly available internet website,

Client side JavaScript can be considered an application, and then ad business would need to first verify that I am over 18 in order to allow me to see their ads.

Ultimate ad blocker.

[wtallis]

A majority of the news articles that won't load when using NoScript give an error message to the effect of "this application requires JavaScript". It would be nice to see all the unjustified overuse of heavy JS application frameworks for what could have been simple web pages lead to some significant negative consequences.

[autoexec]

This law means that your operating system has to collect your age and make it avilable to every website/application so ad businesses can just get that data from our OS automatically and go right on serving ads without having to verify anything themselves.

[general1465]

Yes, the presence of such mandatory kill switch is what makes it ultimate adblocker.

[frshgts]

good to know that `grep` will have to check how old i tell my os i am before it will do anything

[nickjj]

This reminds me of an org I used to work at where they had CrowdStrike installed on every work laptop.

I once used curl to download a shell script from GitHub and it caused a defcon 1 event where security reached out to me asking why I downloaded it.

[davorak]

Which seems like a silly accidental overreach of the law. If that is the way it applies.

The literal reading of the law says this only required when a child is the primary user of the device.

> (b) (1) A developer shall request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched.

but 'user' here is:

> (i) “User” means a child that is the primary user of the device.

So these rules should only apply to accounts/devices where a child is the primary user.

Grep on an adult's machine would not need to check how old you are, at least with a literal reading of the law.

[frshgts]

How else but the signal could it determine whether the user is an adult or not?

[davorak]

I do not think the law provides guidance here. The signal is only required when children are the primary device/account users. So one model would be any initial account set up is automatically considered the 'account holder' and not a child account. Then it would be prerogative of the 'account holder' to set up child accounts or not. That seems to fit into the spirt and literal parts of the law.

So grep/ls/etc are all installed as part of that 'account holder' and do not need to do any age verification.

The signal only needs to be checked when the device/account user is a child and when downloading apps. I think an unfortunate consequence here is that the literal definition of the law says package managers probably can not run on children accounts without jumping through a bunch of hoops. Which is bad for children learning code/computers/etc.

The first thing I would change about this law would be:

> (b) (1) A developer shall request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched.

Any application that does not need to know a users age should not be required request the 'signal'

[singron]

The whole point of the bill is to create a cause of action for the Attorney General to sue companies. In the bill, they say the damages are up to $2,500 per negligently affected child ($7,500 if intentional), so it doesn't matter how many non-children it affects. E.g. if the OS/appstore/accounts/application is in the context of a workplace that only employs adults, none of this matters.

[hnburnsy]

So my Garmin watch, my Home Assistant OS, maybe even my Shelly devices?

I want to know who is behind these laws like this one and the 3D printer gun verification, that seem to pop up across state legislatures all at the same time.

[sidewndr46]

It sure sounds like my Arduino is subject to this since it can download a sketch and run it when hooked to my PC

[jrmg]

Yes, that’s clearly the intent of the bill (note I’m not commenting on the wisdom of this idea!)