Linux

16789 readers

341 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
No NSFW adult content
Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world

I Spoke To The Dev Behind The Systemd Birth Date Change - YouTube (www.youtube.com)

submitted 1 day ago by possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip to c/linux@lemmy.world

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] vole@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A developer submitted a PR code change for systemd userdb.

My proposals (that's really what PRs are) are to implement a solution that meets the regulatory requirements in several jurisdictions by providing a way to store a self-reported birthdate locally on the machine. These laws also require that this date is collected during account creation (hence why I made PRs against installers) and you can enter any value here, even January 1st, 1900. There is no proof required, no ID scanning, and no external tracking. Nor do I have any desire for that to ever change.

Apparently the developer is confirmed to be just a regular guy. He thinks it'd be worse if every desktop environment implements their own solution to comply with these laws. He's against the various laws related to this incident.

As a fallout for submitting this pull request, he has been extensively harassed. His personal information being repeatedly posted online; his information used to sign up to a lot of sites, groups, churches, car dealerships, ordering food for him; threats of murder; regular textual harassment.

[–] StealthLizardDrop@piefed.social -3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Deserves, the change is garbage, it affects so few people and now the rest of us have this option to be forced to use it at a later date. garbage human. Most of linux users will not be touched by any of this garbage law. i am rather militant over this

[–] lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Yes, the dev deserves to be harassed and receive literal death threats because checks notes he added a completely optional field.

Grow the fuck up.

[–] Nilz@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He thinks it'd be worse if every desktop environment implements their own solution to comply with these laws.

Sure he has a point there, but putting it in systemd means there will need to be at least one other implementation for systems that don't use systemd...

[–] HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are you suggesting that we should put this field in the kernel instead.

[–] Nilz@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm not suggesting anything specific. But the point of rushing to implement your way into software A to prevent each software having their own implementation does not make sense to me. This is not a proper way to standardise. There are many months left to make a proposal that works for everyone.