The way you currently say it, they tried to stop the exemption. They fought for the law, so OS gets an exemption.

Or do I understand you wrong?

According to this website https://github.com/BryanLunduke/DoesItAgeVerify

System76 also planned to implement age verification should the law pass. They did not claim that they'll relocate or re-register their company legally, or request their users upon installation to not use the OS in California/Colorado, or anything like that actually.

I think that's noteworthy. I personally consider it half a fight. Like, you create noise, but if boss says it's OK, you say "OK, you're the boss after all".

based

Porn websites will most likely going to have age verification enabled. So, it might not matter what OS or browser kids use to visit such websites.

Also: << the nerds aren't going to do any of this shit, so... let's look like the good guys by exempting them so we don't look terrible when the nerds show how obviously this is all security theater >>

"We don't want to risk Linux getting banned and destroying our complete technical ecosystem"

It would wildly fuck with enterprise systems because you would have to have a way to verify age for the users of EVERY system. The way it is now you would have to verify the age of users of iot and smart devices. You have to have id to turn on your lights or use the refrigerator.

Instead of age verification, it should be improved parental controls. Make it more obvious how to set them up. The initial boot for windows first page could be "are you setting this up for an adult or child?", even require shops selling computers to make sure customers understand that.

Make the parents take the responsibility they are currently somehow managing to avoid.

Is it even technically possible to enforce it on open-source application, with code readily available for tweaks and modifications?

It's fundamentally unenforceable, even if they tried to do what they've done to phones and not allow other OS's to be installed, you could still get development boxes, embedded boxes, etc that by nature of being what they are could not have locked boot loaders.

Well, politics isn't about finding the one principle to rule them all. The folks/companies that find restricting access to children important, probably don't particularly care about some Linux devices being excluded. And other folks/companies find not restricting their Linux server really important, so that's a compromise that can be made.

I imagine, they landed on specifically open-source being excluded as the more abstract rule, because open-source in particular has a problem here.
Anyone can download open-source software and run it. In most cases, there is no central backend, which could handle age verification.

And even if there is, it's not really financially viable to offer that for anyone who downloads the software for free. Requiring payment to access the binaries or the source code would also effectively kill the open-source ecosystem, which is also not in the interest of most people.

Because this is temporary. FOSS OS' will be forced to comply in 10-15years max if the law stands.

Why do you assume that Microsoft doesn't want to comply?

They already have GDID which tracks you everywhere you go on the Internet and is tied to your $M💩 account

Do the people actually want this? I assumed it was lawmakers serving oligarchs.

Windows already is annoying to use.💔🫩

Pretty sure they don't need help with that...

Slap some Proposition 65 warning labels on the Windows update warnings, that should help. I'm sure windows can cause cancer in some way.

The actual language in the law is "under license terms that permit a recipient to copy, redistribute, and modify the software". So yeah all the FOSS licenses and even some commercial ones are exempt, only the EULA-ridden shit (i.e. macOS and windows) is gonna be affected. I wonder if Google will start releasing "Chromiumbooks" with license terms that allow them to evade this law.