this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2026
365 points (82.6% liked)

Linux

64014 readers
2020 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] glitching@lemmy.ml 73 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

to all y'all with the "it's just a text field": what if the field is "race"? "sexual orientation"? "jerks_off_to"? what the fuck has a system managing daemon got to do with any of that? and why would you preemptively put it in there without even a pretense of a fight?

fuck you make us! make linux illegal, in Cali of all places. guess how long that will last?

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Yeah, scary.

What about some other scary fields like:

  • Real Name
  • Office Address
  • Office number
  • Office telephone number
  • Home telephone number
  • external e-mail address

I mean if those fields were stored, could you imagine the danger that Linux users would be in?

You don't have to imagine, because those fields have been stored in UNIX/Linux since 1962. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gecos_field

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Your argument is an informal fallacy called Whataboutism.

I invite you to educate yourself by reading about it on Wikipedia

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

You should read the article and understand the difference between a comparison and Whataboutism.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Those are also entirely optional and not having them filled in doesn't cause other software to stop doing what the user wants.

[–] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

(same for the birthDate field)

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Not true. Because the stated purpose of the laws at play is to enable that to be queried so that sites can decide what is appropriate for you to see.

[–] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 51 minutes ago

That is the purpose, but the field is implemented as optional and modifiable with admin privileges.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

Depends how these new laws are written.

[–] death_to_carrots@feddit.org 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The same with the birthDate field.

[–] Grazed@lemmy.world -1 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

... unless someone merges a PR making it required, which is the discussion of this thread.

[–] ruan@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

What if someone makes a PR making your real name and address being required? Damn...

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

You're right.

"What if <insert dystopian scenario that hasn't happened>?" is a silly argument.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 2 points 14 hours ago

And then you can input a random date from before 1940 and forget about it...

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think back then it was generally assumed this simply assisted with office communication.

Imagine telling a UNIX engineer in the 70's how almost everything you enter into a machine would eventually be used to manipulate or entrap you by the State and surveillance capitalism.

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Who cares why it is stored, these fields exist for every user in every Linux system and they have existed for decades.

Either birthDate the field is dangerous or it isn't. If it is, how?

It is no different than data fields that ask for way more identifiable and personal information such as Real Name and Office number which have, again, existed for decades without issue.

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Ah, but this time the government wants it to be able to be queried so that applications and web sites can decide what to do with you. That's the difference.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

The government's wants are not in the PR. The PR is an optional JSON field.

The field isn't dangerous, you're conflating two different things.

The age verification laws are the threat, not an optional text field or the developer who added it.

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I care. One thing is "you know, fields with this name have been around since before you were born", another thing is "some idiots passed the law half the globe away, now we are preparing your system to comply. Someone has to (c)". The field is not the danger, the thinking, attitude and act is

Edit: some local law, for fuck's sake

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Half a world away where do you live since this is happening everywhere. To be half a world away from any place doing this would be hard.

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

Being half a world away from Americas is pretty easy, don't ya think?

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That's a fair argument.

Is it fair to say: The field is benign but there is contention about if it should be added or not and users of the software are concerned that their voices were not heard on the issue. That can be handled in the normal project framework, perhaps by suggesting a publicly stated policy about these issues around legal compliance so the community can determine if they want to support the project or not.

My argument is that I don't think that the damage that was done justifies the hitpiece in the OP which is, almost literally, painting a target on the developer with the mugshot photograph and loaded language.

So, if you're not one of the people then we're having different conversations. In that conversation, I do agree with what you just said. I'd like to see the very large projects, which affect a lot of users, such as systemd, have a more formal way to accept public comment and respond on contentious changes and feature requests.

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It is not a hit piece. No call to action was stated.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

It paints him as an active danger, puts his picture on a wanted poster, includes his full name, workplace and the city and state where he lives and then writes up an article like an after action report of a cyberattack.

It then implies that he's going to do it again and that he can't be persuaded and so will be 'harder to stop'.

Taylor believes what he's doing is right, which makes him harder to stop than someone acting for money. Taylor already has the resume line and knows the codebase well enough to try again. That's the true believer pattern. The argument is ideological, so persuasion is off the table.

So if he's done a bad thing, he's going to do it again, and you can't persuade him.

If you can't read the implied call to action then you're being deliberately dense.

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

To be fair, I am bit split on this. On one hand, name and shame is an effective strategy and should be used. On the other hand, "put age verification into Linux" is a hilarious stretch. And yes, it feels strange that I have yet to see any kind of response from other systemd maintainers and managers - after all, the man authored a pull-request, not merged into into upstream. I have not been looking for that kind of response myself though, which also serves your point: putting all the blame and anger on this one man (I purposefully omit name) is too much

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Is it fair to say: The field is benign

It is benign if it is optional, remains 100% local and under the user's control and doesn't prevent other software from functioning as expected.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

It is optional, 100% local, under the user's control and does not prevent other software from functioning as expected.

If it ever is not, then you can simply fork the project at or before that change.

[–] jdnewmil@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You must be off by a decade. Your reference mentions no OS and Unic was developed around 1970.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Your reference mentions no OS