• 3 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 29 days ago
cake
Cake day: February 18th, 2026

help-circle

  • It can be done like that, but then it’d be (trivially) fake-able by anyone with root permissions on their own computer. But then, my point is that kids shouldn’t be root of their computers, so let’s just parents vouch for children’s age, and leave everything more complicated out.

    From what I understood, the rules (in California?) would be : a) Every operating system provider must collect the user’s age or date of birth during the initial account setup process. b) The OS must classify the user into one of the four defined age brackets: under 13 years old, 13–15 years old, 16–17 years old, or 18 years and older. c) This information must be made available to application developers through a real-time API as soon as an application is launched or downloaded.

    Unless I’ve missed something, I could definitely live with that. I haven’t seen anything more acceptable when it comes to age verification. Point a) doesn’t need to prove age or date of birth.

    Now there is a small issue that came to my mind since my first post, which might be quite problematic : if ANY website is able to tell whether ANY user is a child, it’ll be as easy to keep children out of certain sites that it’ll be easy to keep adults out of others.

    Imagine a bulletin board with highly disturbing/predatory content which would ONLY show to kids? Whenever mom or dad checks, website is all normal. And that would be real bad, probably worse than our current, no age verified situation.










  • their snapshots are marked as copy on write, so my assumption is that for every write, there is replication somewhere.

    I might be wrong here, but my understanding is that their snapshots are the kind we find in modern filesystems (ZFS/BTRFS/…) : that is a point-in-time kind of functionnality, where a file will be duplicated (and the original version then will only belong to the snapshot) only when it is written to. This is just the way snapshots are implemented here - and a rather common way of doing it efficiently - not a reliability feature.




  • There’s no such thing as a “dating league”. People are selective, but the nature of that selectivity depends on the individual.

    Exactly this. I can’t deal with anymore “rating” of people’s attractiveness, as daily seen on Reddit and the such. Beauty, attractiveness, and overall interest a person generates is highly (if not solely) dependent on said interest’s other end.

    There is something deeply flawed in trying to put people into small, numbered boxes.