A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification (pcgamer.com)

Article summary

A new California law requires operating system providers to implement age verification at account setup, which will provide a signal to applications regarding the user's age bracket. The law applies to all operating systems, including Linux, and requires providers to collect age verification information and pass it to developers upon request. The law is set to take effect on January 1, 2027, and its enforcement and impact on the tech industry are still uncertain. Some operating systems, like Windows, already collect age information during account setup, but others may need to adapt to comply with the law.

Main themes

• age verification
• operating system regulation
• government control
• privacy concerns
• technology law
• minor protection
• anonymity and surveillance
• open-source operating systems
• parental control

What commenters say

• The law is unlikely to be effective in preventing minors from accessing age-restricted content, as users can simply lie about their age.
• The law sets a dangerous precedent for government control over technology and could lead to further erosion of privacy and freedom.
• The requirement for age verification could lead to a loss of anonymity and increased surveillance, potentially endangering minors rather than protecting them.
• Some commenters believe that the law is a foot in the door for further government regulation of technology and could have unintended consequences.
• The law may be unenforceable, especially for open-source operating systems, and could lead to a situation where operating systems simply add a disclaimer saying they are not for use in California.
• The use of age verification could lead to a situation where predators can more easily target minors, as they will be able to identify and contact them more easily.
• The law is seen as a form of parental control, but some argue that it is not an effective or desirable way to protect minors.
• The law's broad definitions of 'application' and 'covered application store' could lead to unintended consequences and overly broad enforcement.