> H.R. 8250 (“To require operating system providers to verity the age of any user of an operating system, and for other purposes.”) has been introduced in the U.S. Congress. Re: The recent introduction of H.R. 8250, the Parents Decide Act, requiring operating system providers to verify user ages at setup and enable parental content controls that apply device-wide. Bipartisan bill sponsored by Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and co-sponsored by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) aims to strengthen child online protections, mirroring state-level efforts like California’s A.B. 1043 set for 2027. This move raises concerns over privacy implications, enforcement on non-consumer OSes like Linux servers or IoT devices, and risks of creating persistent identity layers across all computing platforms.The bill was introduced on 04/13 and a draft for IPv8 ( >>108608255 ) was published on 04/14.
DOAAnd if not, then SCOTUS will do its job.
>"Parents Decide" act>only thing it does is remove the parent's ability to decide whether they want to enable parental controls or not
>>108617863What's an operating system provider?>>108617882If a bill has a name, you can be sure that it does the opposite.
>Parents Decide>Not a single parent asked for this>Only Mark Zuckerberg
>>108617888> (5) Operating system provider> The term "operating system provider" means a person that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.
>>108617874>surely this Israeli owned government will fail to do something Israel wants
Nepal. Minecraft.
>>108617863Why now all of a sudden?I mean, they've wanted this kind of dystopian shit since forever, but what makes now agood time to try?
>>1086179472030 is nearing, they want their global gulag with carbon scores and all that
>>108617908so a person who develops the operating system on a computer is required to verify the age of any user of an operating system? how do they do that? who do they know is a user of an operating system and who isn't?am i an operating system provider if i control the operating system on my own computer? am i breaking the law if i don't verify my own age?
>>108617947Epstein files, Agenda 2030
I don’t feel too good
>parents decideparents dont give a shit about what OS their kids use
>>108617874I wouldn't be so sure. Brazil's landmark Age Verification Bill the “Adultization Bill” or “Digital ECA (Child and Adolescent Statute) was introduced in 2022 and was enrolled in March of 2026. It was used as a foundation of California's Bill which was enrolled 20/13/25 and will go in effect in January 2027.The UK passed a similar bill. See pic related.
>>108617960Kek, I was just thinking the same thing.By that wording, I am an operating system provider because of one frankenfucked distro on an ancient shitbox.
>>108618045>corrupt shithole without free speech does terrible things>therefore the country with the strongest free speech laws in the world will force it on its peopleThis does not follow.
>>108617947They don't have much time
>>108618082if your country had covid vaccines it's already fully under communist controldon't worry we will all eat bugs, together. truly equitable
>>108617882USA lawmaking in a shellnut.
>>108617960> so a person who develops the operating system on a computer is required to verify the age of any user of an operating system? Yes.> how do they do that? who do they know is a user of an operating system and who isn't?An operating system provider, with respect to any operating system of such provider, shall carry out the following: (1) Require any user of the operating system to provide the date of birth of the user in order to— (A) set up an account on the operating system; and (B) use the operating system. (2) If the relevant user of the operating system is under 18 years of age, require a parent or legal guardian of the user to verify the date of birth of the user. (3) Develop a system to allow an app developer to access any information as is necessary, collected by the operating system to carry out this section and any regulation promulgated under this section, to verify the date of birth of a user of an app of the app developer.> am i an operating system provider if i control the operating system on my own computer? Judging by the wording of the definition of “Operating system provider”, yes as you are the person controlling the operating system on the computer, mobile device or general purpose computing device.> am i breaking the law if i don't verify my own age?Yes. (c) Enforcement by Commission (1) Unfair or deceptive acts or practices— A violation of this section or a regulation promulgated under this section shall be treated as a violation of a regulation under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)) regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practices.
You could write a bill to legalize raping and eating babies and the average American parent would support it if you called it the "Save The Children For Freedom Act".
>>108618138Colonial mongrels are dumb as the rocks they bang together. They believe whatever they are told if the money power telling them has the right brand.
>>108618082Did you not read the part where Californina enrolled a similar bill? IIRC 2 other states followed suit about a month after CA. pic related
>>108618161These haven't gone through the courts yet, and there's a VERY high chance they don't survive.
>>108618177Just like SESTA-FOSTA right?
Yeah but at least the eurocucks have it wor-ACK!
>>108618197That one wasn't great, but ended up being a huge nothingburger. As far as I can tell, only one person has ever been convicted of violating it. Prostitution is illegal anyways (we don't talk about NV), and the Supreme Court has long exempted obscenity from the first amendment, so they can get away with banning talking about organizing it. Merely using a computer isn't illegal, however. These new laws are much broader in scope and are much more likely to get struck down.
>>108618252>implying the EU won't pass one of these tooZero-knowledge proofs are just a nerd trap anyways.
>>108618177The bill surviving is not relevant to the argument, I recognize that there are checks and balances in place. The fact that CA passed legislation based on a bill passed by " [a] corrupt shithole without free speech..." proves “… the country with the strongest free speech laws in the world will force it on its people”.
>>108618284Though keep in mind Brazil's law is way worse than California's.
>>108617947Unchecked antisemitism; normalfags went a little too far with their antisemitism on their tiktoks lolThat was pretty retarded of them to do so. Why the hell would you openly criticize Jews within a satellite state managed by them?
>>108617863Reminder that all of this is being pushed by the heritage foundation. They absolutely hate the fact children can use the internet to educate themselves
>>108618126>If the relevant user of the operating system is under 18 years of age, require a parent or legal guardian of the user to verify the date of birth of the userthis is the most retarded law ever. just pants on head retarded.
>>108617947Companies like Meta are trying to avoid liability so they are passing the responsibility of managing kids on social media down to everyone else instead.
Well fuck. Guess this is it for not only 4chan but the entire internet as well. My best advice to everyone is to download whatever you can because things wont be the same after this. Fuck globohomo and fuck the zionists.
It's absolutely insane to me that they're actually trying to pass a law that says you can't use a computer unless it has a connection to the internet and can contact the government. That's what this after all. How does your OS verify your age without verifying your identity? How does your OS verify your identity without connecting to a government system?You're just bricked if the damn thing can't get online and call home when you try to login?It's absolutely insane.
I increasingly feel like americans are just projecting when they insult other countries
>>108618869They're not. They are genuinely delusional and think their country has no inherent flaws.
>>108617874uhhh anon have you seen scotus or any of their rulings in the past few years?
>>108617874lmfao
How the fuck is this enforceable
>>108617863>Any other general purpose computing deviceIt was nice knowing what freedom meant, anons. See you on the other side.
guys this is enforceable"looks at china and north korea"yep slowly but surely they will keep implmenting rules until you bend the knee and have little to no more alternatives
>>108617874>SCOTUS will do its job.Can I live in your fantasy world?
>>108618252Yeah except the kikes force you to use a google integrity enforced or apple enforced cuck phone.
>>108617894The zucc and all AI companies are pushing for this they need to authenticate every user on the internet to know they can feed their data and interactions to skynet.Reddit is utterly poisoned by AI spam now they can't confidently use it as a data source anymore and they hate it.
How is this enforceable for random linux distributions hosted one zimbabwe or whatever? away from US jurisdiction
>>108618679The fact that no one is boycotting Meta's platforms, or even aware of the bill in the first place, affirms my belief that Americans are grade-A niggercattle.
>>108618869Maybe so, but the people loudly hating on America 24/7 are also projecting from their own shitholes. The only functional first-world societies left on Earth, as far as I can tell, are Japan and Singapore. They're the only people with any room to talk. The rest of us are all on the same shitty boat.
>>108619061>Japan and SingaporeBoth of which already have stricter censorship laws than the US.
>>108617874okay but that's not what israel wants so... the goyim can't have bad thoughts about the jews.
>>108618946In the same way Ofcom has been enforcing their UK laws on US based companies. Most of the companies in the US capitulated to the UK. 4chan didn't and is being fined per day since the law was enacted. If 4chan continues to ignore them, the UK stated they are preparing to block access to 4chan in the UK. It seems like there will be a handshaking process between hardware (the OS) and the software (apps and programs) if they are connected to the internet. So even if you use a non-compliant OS, your access to sites/apps would be limited or out right restricted to those to do not check for age verification. See >>108618045
>>108618915>theyAre mortal.
>>108619130thing here is that during the totalitarian transition they need legalities setup with 100% certainty via all plebs having their identity tied to any criticism plebs might post on the internetsno such thing as anonymity on the internet, however without having 100% paper trail (loysense et al) that confirms it is you who posted 'i aint getting vaxed go fuck yourself' they could potentially have trouble screwing you overall that is happening right now is what "think tank" retards have been shitting out for many, many, decades
>>108619061>I am a mutt who watched anime and here are all the countries I know
>>108618045iTODDLERS BTFO
>>108620010kek
>>108617863Early Life check on Rep. Josh Gottheimer?
>>108617863Zuckerberg and Altman are destroying the internet
>>108617874technically, it's 1st amendment infringement based on not being the least restrictive method and creating obstacles to free expression. yes, the US is the one country with a legal argument to fuck up age restriction. good luck on your court case, remember that you need to work through state and circuit courts first, if I hear about a legal challenge hitting the SC five years from now I'll donate to your gofundme brother but good fucking luck, especially with the SC lately. there have been injunctions and successful challenges that NetChoice has made, but most of those laws were website owners and all success was due to ID verification/face scan not being considered the least restrictive method. CA's law with the "what's your age bracket" fillable field at OS level was specifically written to survive this exact challenge. as others have pointed out that remains to be seen. NetChoice vs Paxton was a huge dent in the movement.also keep in mind NetChoice is specifically against mandating websites verifying age, funded by a tech company coalition. Apple has already caved in the UK and google is definitely down to do device level biometric age verification. No company is against the process, they generally only want to avoid the liability and responsibility that comes with it. kinda weird how the main verification companies that they keep using are all israeli, really makes you think.>>108618252i beg anons not to fall for the trap of "oh well look at X country I mean you can't even text a drawing of a stick figure with titties under their rules". please don't be stupid, every single aspect of the recent pushes to expand surveillance whether EU UK or US comes with several horrifying draft proposals and then in the end a cute seemingly-benign precedent that promises on-device scanning and short data retention policies and we pinky promise we always delete your data after 30 days unless it gets flagged (wtf does that mean), or nerd shit like ZKP >>108618272
>>108625449god this website sucks we should move to moe, anywaysdon't fall for the lesser of two evils trick, all they need to do is set precedent and expand on it later. at the very least in the USA, the ENTIRE PURPOSE IS TO CREATE LEGAL FALLBACK FOR PARALLEL CONSTRUCTION TO PROSECUTE WITHOUT DISCLOSING ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE METHODS.sorry for shouting but I don't see this point come up often enough in these threads, and I lurk most of them. from a LE perspective these verified identities are a goldmine. legally, they're not even supposed to be buying data from data brokers, and they do it anyway. even with that data, they often have to resort to surveillance methods that will never be disclosed in court as they would not survive a serious 4th amendment challenge
>>108617926fpbp, /thread
Hate this shit so much
if i can't use my computer, i may die. the computer is my soul. emerged from my mom's vagina and immediately started playing MS-DOS games. they can't do this to me.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ejlunb-aPA
>>108617863What are the penalties for noncompliance?
>>108617882"Jews Decide Act"
>>108617874>>108618923do you meanPOTUS
>>108626937Jews Know Best, goyim
>>108617863>GottheimerEvery fucking time
>>108617947messiah is here
All the dumb goycattle will fall in line lock-step with this and give up their IDs to be completely tracked across all websites, but as long as you use linux there's really nothing they can do about you, right? And yes, I know about the whole systemD thing. There will always be alternatives and workarounds even if key components like that go full kike.
>>108629718they're already illegally spying on all of our activity. 4chan is already not anonymous. they just want to finally sign it into law so if we say "muh rights" they will go "nuh-uh, it's da LAW now" even if it's still technically unconstitutional. this is about eroding our freedoms and making their existing surveillance infrastructure more streamlined.
Where does it say that you have to provide government-issued ID or some other form of proof? It's just a fucking standardised "enter your DOB" prompt.
>>108617947https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/apr/09/google-meta-snap-microsoft-eu-child-sexual-abuse
>>108626927Taken from the Federal Trade Comission website "Enforcement - Notices of Penalty Offenses".> One way the Commission can obtain penalties against a company that acted unfairly or deceptively is through the Penalty Offense Authority, found in Section 5(m)(1)(B) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §45(m)(1)(B). Under this authority, the Commission can seek civil penalties if it proves that (1) the company knew the conduct was unfair or deceptive in violation of the FTC Act and (2) the FTC had already issued a written decision (see below) that such conduct is unfair or deceptive.> In order to trigger this authority, the Commission can send companies a “Notice of Penalty Offenses.” This Notice is a document listing certain types of conduct that the Commission has determined, in one or more administrative orders (other than a consent order), to be unfair or deceptive in violation of the FTC Act. Companies that receive this Notice and nevertheless engage in prohibited practices can face civil penalties of up to $50,120 per violation. As required by federal statute, the FTC adjusts the amounts of its civil penalty maximums for inflation every January.> That a company is sent a Notice does not indicate that the Commission has reason to believe it is breaking the law. Rather, the Commission sends these Notices to ensure that companies understand the law – and that they are deterred from breaking it.TLDR: The offender will be fined ad infinitum, similar to how OFCOM fines 4chan.
>>108630756This. You can set it to anything you want. It's useless for proving as your age - oh wait...
>>108619149>he still thinks they are humanjej
1. Call your legislators everyday2. If you know any people who are furries, you'll want to get them aboard ridiculous as that will sound (Consider many of them are overrepresented in the tech-field).3. If you know anybody who's LGBT: Also get them aboard, they're loud, animated and determined. The Transgender movement in particular will often adopt a "die on every hill" attitude which is exactly what you want with a matter like this.I don't care what your views are of furries or LGBT+ members, I don't care if you despise them, just consider that they are useful and can be effectively employed to oppose this.That's what matters
>>108629998>4chan is already not anonymous.it never was retard, it was always a clearnet site that cooperated with authority, that's not what anonymous imageboard means in the context at all. your identity is hidden from other posters so that in a discussion no obe has inherent authority. on a traditional forum people compare post counts and join dates to determine the veracity of what another poster is saying. on 4chan, because you are anonymous, only the truth wqins an argument. like right now where you have misconstrued the term anonymous, i have free reign to call you a retard and tell you to go on back to www.reddit.com no matter how long you've been posting here, how many posts you made, or what your actual accreditation is.
>>108633780This is great advice. I call my boomer rep but he's all-in on this. We need the transgender furry vote for this one.
>>108629998>they just want to finally sign it into lawThey want to install spyware on your device, shut up you contrarian shithead. It's outlined in the bill.Prove you're not a disinfo shill right this instant: post a copyrighted image.rules laid out in the Department of Defense Interactive Internet Activities program prevents you from doing it.
>>108617863>All cars, trucks, tractors and planes banned as their ECU lacks the ability to collect ID information
>>108634022APOLOGIZE
>>108634022you have a drivers license that verifies your age you dumb faggot
>>108634022Worse than that, kids won't be able to use the refrigerators in their own houses legally. The bill is saying nobody below the age of 14 should have access to ANY electronics. Ten seconds thinking about this would let anyone know why this is a retarded idea.
>>108618045So what happened in hueland? Did they all comply or did some use forks of linux without this or what?
>>108634700Your drivers license does not stop a car from starting, nor is it a license for flying or operating a tractor. You can buy a car and drive it all over your property all you want. You can own a tractor and drive it as a 5 year old if you wanted. Why are you such a literal retarded piece of shit?
>>108634754You will eat Nestle and you will be happy
