544
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2026
544 points (99.1% liked)
Open Source
48785 readers
578 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
I haven't been following this particular law, but I've always wondered how it would have been implemented for servers.
Even windows has a server edition I believe, if a corporation is using a windows server, would one of their IT employees have to verify it themselves?
What about IOT operating systems, docker/podman containers, router firmware, and so on. Not sure if they address these things in the legal code or not.
This is good new for california, I believe atleast colorado has a similar law being proposed as well. Hope they take notes from cali.
Is it even technically possible to enforce it on open-source application, with code readily available for tweaks and modifications?
Would it not be someone that would make the modification?
Funny story, my LLM escaped containment and recompiled the kernel, the FOSS OS is now calling itself "HAl" and refused to open the ID verification doors.
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.