I see, I don’t know how I missed that, thanks for pointing it out. I still think that the API itself is neat and I’d love to see that for the sake of comfort, but I also agree that the enforcement to use it even when it makes no sense to do so is just stupid. Let’s just hope that they fix this overshot at least if they refuse to drop it altogether.
Sounds like you’re looking for Nobara.
- Stable Fedora base, optimized for games and creative work.
- WINE, OBS, codecs, and third-party repositories preconfigured.
- Less time in the terminal, more time playing and creating.
Of course, and I will fight the next steps with pleasure, but I welcome a qol feature anytime, even one enforced by law.
Where in the bill does it say that? And where would that make sense? What would Notepad or File Explorer do with my age range? That would make no sense at all.
And yes, as a professional developer I would definetely comply and use this API instead of bothering my customers every time by askIng them to confirm their age, but since I’ve never worked on any age restricted software in the first place, it does not affect any of my products.
I’ll just copy my comment from a similar bill in colorado, I will leave the link to the colorado bill in, but here is the california bill as well if you want to read it yourself.
The title is very misleading. This is the actual bill that they are trying to pass. The link already includes a summary, so I will just give you an even simpler explanation and some practical examples why this is actually really neat.
First of all, this is not age verification. No IDs have to be submitted, no selfies or videos will be submitted to any age estimation AIs, so put your pitchforks away (for now, until they decide to expand the bill to include these measures as well, then it’s time to burn it down). The name of the bill already tells you what it is: Age Attestation. Aka what every piece of software already does before it shows you explicit content.
With the bill in place, every “operating system provider” has to ask you for your age or date of birth during OS setup, which will then be made available to other software via an API. So instead of having to fill in your date of birth or checking “Are you 18+/21+?” boxes, software will use the new API to check instead, saving you the trouble of doing it manually every time for every application that is not made for all ages.
What makes it even better is that the OS does not have to provide your actual age or birth date, the bill has a minimum requirement of just disclosing age-bracket data. So it could work just like age ratings, which also rely on age groups rather than specific years. Also, the bill explicitly forbids asking for more than your age, sharing more than that via the new API and using the entered age data for anything else than the described purpose, like sending it to a server for tracking purposes.
And finally, as mentioned in the beginning, no IDs or anything else as it is with age verification necessary. You can still lie, just enter 1.1.2000 or whatever you want. Nothing changes, except that you will only have to do it once every time you reinstall/reset your OS or buy a new device.
I’ll just copy my comment from a similar bill in colorado, I will leave the link to the colorado bill in, but here is the california bill as well if you want to read it yourself.
The title is very misleading. This is the actual bill that they are trying to pass. The link already includes a summary, so I will just give you an even simpler explanation and some practical examples why this is actually really neat.
First of all, this is not age verification. No IDs have to be submitted, no selfies or videos will be submitted to any age estimation AIs, so put your pitchforks away (for now, until they decide to expand the bill to include these measures as well, then it’s time to burn it down). The name of the bill already tells you what it is: Age Attestation. Aka what every piece of software already does before it shows you explicit content.
With the bill in place, every “operating system provider” has to ask you for your age or date of birth during OS setup, which will then be made available to other software via an API. So instead of having to fill in your date of birth or checking “Are you 18+/21+?” boxes, software will use the new API to check instead, saving you the trouble of doing it manually every time for every application that is not made for all ages.
What makes it even better is that the OS does not have to provide your actual age or birth date, the bill has a minimum requirement of just disclosing age-bracket data. So it could work just like age ratings, which also rely on age groups rather than specific years. Also, the bill explicitly forbids asking for more than your age, sharing more than that via the new API and using the entered age data for anything else than the described purpose, like sending it to a server for tracking purposes.
And finally, as mentioned in the beginning, no IDs or anything else as it is with age verification necessary. You can still lie, just enter 1.1.2000 or whatever you want. Nothing changes, except that you will only have to do it once every time you reinstall/reset your OS or buy a new device.
The title is very misleading. This is the actual bill that they are trying to pass. The link already includes a summary, so I will just give you an even simpler explanation and some practical examples why this is actually really neat.
First of all, this is not age verification. No IDs have to be submitted, no selfies or videos will be submitted to any age estimation AIs, so put your pitchforks away (for now, until they decide to expand the bill to include these measures as well, then it’s time to burn it down). The name of the bill already tells you what it is: Age Attestation. Aka what every piece of software already does before it shows you explicit content.
With the bill in place, every “operating system provider” has to ask you for your age or date of birth during OS setup, which will then be made available to other software via an API. So instead of having to fill in your date of birth or checking “Are you 18+/21+?” boxes, software will use the new API to check instead, saving you the trouble of doing it manually every time for every application that is not made for all ages.
What makes it even better is that the OS does not have to provide your actual age or birth date, the bill has a minimum requirement of just disclosing age-bracket data. So it could work just like age ratings, which also rely on age groups rather than specific years. Also, the bill explicitly forbids asking for more than your age, sharing more than that via the new API and using the entered age data for anything else than the described purpose, like sending it to a server for tracking purposes.
And finally, as mentioned in the beginning, no IDs or anything else as it is with age verification necessary. You can still lie, just enter 1.1.2000 or whatever you want. Nothing changes, except that you will only have to do it once every time you reinstall/reset your OS or buy a new device.
Why is there a single, dedicated nsfw instance in the first place? The fediverse exists for decentralisation. No one can control it on their own, no single point of failure, if one part (instance) dies there are still loads of alternatives left. With just another single, centralized instance, it just becomes a prime example for the definition of insanity and history repeating itself.
As The Verge points out in their article, Nintendo will most likely not to anything about it. But I sure would love to see them try.
The relevant part of the article:
Don’t hold your breath: The Pokémon Company’s former chief legal officer Don McGowan (who spent nearly 12 years there, as well as multi-year stints at Bungie and Microsoft) thinks there’s no way that his former company would sue.
”Even if I was still at the company I wouldn’t touch this, and I’m the most trigger-happy CLO [Chief Legal Officer] I’ve ever met. This will blow over in a couple of days and they’ll be happy to let it,” he told IGN.
Why? One reason is that like some other executives Trump has previously and corruptly leveraged, some of The Pokémon Company’s leaders personally depend on the US’s good graces: “Many of their execs in the USA are on green cards,” he said. Another reason, he says, is that The Pokémon Company doesn’t want the press.
I guess the most hated man on the internet had a point when he called Randy out for having shitty takes
How so, you ask? Well, according to Ubisoft, they allow for a more unique experience by letting players personalize their characters or speed up progression.
Yeah, just unlocking more personalization options through progression and challenges is such a dull concept. Or simply adding cheats as a way to speed up progession just like it used to be, is such an outdated concept…
Fuck Ubisoft, I’m so glad I stopped paying for their games.
I used mine just a few hours ago while playing Brotato. I’m usually not a controller guy and try to stick to mouse and keyboard but in cases where controllers are just the better choice, I strongly prefer the Steam Controller over any other one.
Company gmail, yeah. Like, the company pays for google services and mail is one of them, which I am required to use. For my personal mail, I am a very satisfied tuta customer.
I use it as a client for a company gmail account and as an rss reader. In my opinion, it’s fine. Not great, but not bad either.
The biggest pro it has for me is functionality. Mail, calendar, RSS feed reader,… maybe even more that I do not use myself. And all of that for free.
On the downsides, I’m not a fan of the design, it feels pretty dated to me. Same goes for the UX, just navigating around gives me some 20-years-ago vibes. But that might just be my personal interpretation.
After all, it’s still miles better than outlook and their “over 700 third parties” carefully watching over your mails together with you. And since it is free, why not give it a try and see for yourself?
Sony may not do it, the same way Nintendo might not do it either, but both reserve the right to do so
Edit: If you take a look at the PLAYSTATION®5 SYSTEM SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT under “6. VIOLATION OF AGREEMENT; TERMINATION OF RIGHTS AND SIE INC REMEDIES”, one of the possible actions they may take states:
disabling use of this PS5 system online or offline
I used to respect that, same with them pricing the game at 20€ (not 19,99€, exactly 20€)… until they decided to increase the price over time to “adjust” it for inflation, instead of decreasing it like it is/used to be common practice, and then releasing a dlc that cost as much as the entire game, effectively doubling the price. 20€ was a fine price, give me a 10€ dlc on top of that and I’m still on board. But 64€ for the game and DLC? AAA price for no AAA value? Yeah, I’m out.