Debian Project Leader Andreas Tille has addressed the ongoing debate over age-verification laws and their potential impact on free software operating systems. Long story short: he clarified that Debian has not adopted a position and is awaiting legal analysis.
In his latest “Bits from the DPL” message, Tille stated that the main question is whether operating systems and package distribution mechanisms might be required to provide age-related information to applications.
He noted that Debian and other projects are discussing the issue, and that Software in the Public Interest, a non-profit corporation founded to act as a fiscal sponsor for organizations that develop open-source software and hardware, has begun seeking legal guidance.
The dude literally added an optional birthday field next to an optional full name field and an optional adress field
Then he got death threats
If you think that is an appropriate response you are a litteral child, mentally speaking.
It’s not so simple as that, the dude provided a framework for privacy abusers to use to force us into their bullshit. If that framework did not exist they wouldn’t be able to do that so easily. There is absolutely zero reason for there to be a centralized location on an operating system that just hands out your demographic information to whoever asks for it and yes, that includes the fields that already existed. None of it should be in there. This is not something we should be compromising on. There are enough invasions into our privacy as it is.
Doesn’t deserve death threats but he does deserve hate.
Figurative, unless you’re actually proposing a real, measurable, testable large scale mental deficit.
but yeah, death threat are stupid.
I do if you think death threats are appropriate
That seems like a stretch…but you do you i suppose.
So you think there is a world where death threats are warranted for a… Pull request?
That seems like a stretch… But you do you i suppose.
I’ll assume you pulled that mental gymnastic routine out of the same place you store how you think the word literally is supposed to work.
At no point was “pull requests deserve death threats” even hinted at.
Semi-reasonable takes wrapped in logically dubious arguments is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Doubling down with a retort that only requires you to read 5 lines to see it isn’t true is wandering in the fields of free and easy victory and choosing to drown yourself in the 2 inch puddle of defeat.
My brother
You Shakespeare or what?
…because of the last sentence or the word choice in general ?
I don’t think you can include death threats under criticism
Yet here we are
I’m telling you that you did not understand what the guy you replied to really meant
Oh I know what he meant
I just think he relativizes how the discussion was going.
Constructive critizism is of course fine But this whole thing was the exact opposite
Death threats are stupid and indicate severe mental problems. This does not change the fact that the author explicitly mentioned that the aim was compliance with possible age verification laws. Just because he received death threats from some idiot man child does not mean he is right or what he did is inconsequential. It is a statement that they are willing to accept possible future identity verification laws without any legal fight and resistance.