Post B5NQyjWdwFDvQ1P9Ci by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
 (DIR) More posts by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
 (DIR) Post #B5NOtfJ9zXn2yxYOES by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       we still have not gotten around to making any decision on this age verification nonsense
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NQDx0S02LLcO2UPA by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       2 likes, 0 repeats
       
       personally, regardless of what the chuds tell me (its always men, incidentally, who definitely want to tell me my interpretation is wrong), i still see no evidence that alpine is an intended target of any of these bills/laws.and personally speaking, i am happy to leave it at "not for use in the state of California" and watch how quickly the law caves when they realize half of california's GDP is flowing through alpine installations
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NQJirzTIIFVopmvA by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       "but what if companies quit using alpine"1. it seems unlikely2. good, they rarely pay their own way anyway
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NQaZ35EtUdyY3O9g by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       what do i mean by "pay their own way" here?simple.  they consume alpine.  they do not contribute back to alpine.  no code.  no money.  no infrastructure.  nothing.so, frankly?  taking action strictly to facilitate compliance with a law that will never be enforced in the context where alpine is used is not interesting to me.  and I won't be advocating for that.
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NQhLnMui4ctiwHbs by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       anyway, from a policy perspective, @postmarketOS and other derivatives specifically targeted at consumers may need infrastructure for this.presumably we will just build an implementation of whatever canonical/red hat make for their distributions
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NQoBY7PFoB9D45ho by willhbr@ruby.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ariadne imagine if Docker started doing age verification to pull Alpine-based images for users in California 😆
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NQyjWdwFDvQ1P9Ci by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       2 likes, 0 repeats
       
       my point here is that they have the law, they can attempt to enforce the law.and in that scenario, we have the real power: we can say "not for use in California" and every company in silicon valley will be blowing up the governor's phone demanding this law be repealed immediately.so... given that, it is just not a priority for us.
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NRyN7zJQT1uLGQOu by meena@cathode.church
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ariadne how quickly can a company switch to an alternative when most alternatives are 500 × the size of Alpine? in a time where miniscule of RAM costs more than a blackmarket kidney?
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NRyNQQCtDEpVt98K by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       1 likes, 1 repeats
       
       @meena that's my point.  they are already invested in alpine.  a development program to switch to another operating system will take multiple quarters and likely cost money.alpine is a really good deal for business: you get a reasonably fresh enterprise-capable operating system for $0.  you bring your own support & servicing, but the operating system has been designed from the ground up to enable self-service in all things.this is not the case with traditional Enterprise Linux, where the system is designed from the assumption that the user holds a support contract.
       
 (DIR) Post #B5NVVpAaNEzaIT7cR6 by sertonix@social.treehouse.systems
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ariadne I am wondering if it would be enough to ask everybody who complains to pay a lawyer so that they can actually give legal advice. Before that we don't know what the compliant would be and we change nothing
       
 (DIR) Post #B5Nad3sEbQHxhMoC4e by valpackett@social.treehouse.systems
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ariadne i don't think these bills even contemplated the existence of servers and especially not how any "line" between them and end user devices is imaginary
       
 (DIR) Post #B5OHUY4tEOIUnVunmC by NocturnalNessa@infosec.exchange
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ariadne fwiw (and that shouldnt be much because idk shit) i kinda took it for granted that this is what linux in general would do as soon as these laws passed and im a little shocked no one has. and a little shocked by the degree to which lawmakers are insulated from the consequences of their own insanity/hubris in general
       
 (DIR) Post #B5OIJ2SAZOi5U6sacC by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @NocturnalNessa it is complicated:1. lunduke broke this news for the sake of dunking on the linux foundation (there are certainly things that can be said about LF...)2. different linux systems have different design goals, and thus different compliance positions.3. most distributions are probably talking to lawyers and/or discussing the situation with their contributors which have paralegal experience.4. most distributions simply do not have the weight to take this position and have it be meaningful.5. in practice, the law won't be enforced on linux distributions unless they are shaped like a consumer operating system.  and this law is clearly targeted at consumer operating systems.
       
 (DIR) Post #B5OJH9BMgGmnjGgIMK by fiore@brain.worm.pink
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ariadne @NocturnalNessa regulators  wont  even know  about linux  distros unless they come  preinstalled  in  hardware  that can be  bought  at bestbuy .  so like .  not a huge deal
       
 (DIR) Post #B5OJa5qlIJTCtd4vsO by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @fiore @NocturnalNessa that's my point: it is, at most, an "aftermarket modification"