Device makers doesn’t sound like operating system to me. Just need to make sure there is a distro that the device comes with which does this. So if you make ToBeReinstalledOS which only comes with an age checkbox and USB media creation tool to the bare minimum compliance required and no network drivers to prevent accidental age verification. Your device is compliant and can be sold in authoritarian countries.

I wonder if this would be challenged as a 1st amendment issue. For everyone in Illinois, they will be denied government digital resources via compelled speech.

Of course, I don’t expect any sane response to this. If anything, I expect .gov sites to start requiring a selfie with the president to prove your patriotism.

What scares me is the future of this push.

In Australia, after their U16 social media ban, 4 in 5 U16’s still accessed social media they were banned from.

When these bills have little impact b/c minors figure out how to get past age gates, there will be pressure for more draconian measures. It isn’t like the ppl pushing these will shrug and give up. They will demand more and more erosion of local control. More and more corporate lockdown.

Sorry kid, gotta verify your age to use this ti-84

If a local ‘date of birth’ field defaults to ‘18 and up’ if unset; the bracket is communicated using an open, standardized format; specification is on a trust-basis, without external verification required; and the field automatically unsets upon turning 18; I might not be that opposed to an implementation like this.

But without a requirement for legal presence within the state of Illinois, any application developers without it, cannot really be held liable for any infringements on it. Bad actors might also learn which internet users are of which age bracket, and this all might be the beginning of another very slippery slope, where requirements keep building as a result of misuse and/or ineffectiveness.

I was born in 1901, January 1st.

It is terrible. But there is a ray of good news in there too. Not for IL sadly, but for other states that went on this path,

The bill picked up language exempting operating systems and developers distributing software under terms that let anyone copy, redistribute, and modify it freely. It also added a clause blocking platforms from locking down modified versions.

California’s AB-1043 had the same gap. Assembly Member Buffy Wicks, the same lawmaker who wrote AB-1043, introduced AB-1856 to fix it. After several rounds of edits, the amended bill redefines “operating system provider” to exclude anyone distributing software under those same open license terms.

The IL law does not have those carve outs. So ti’s way more draconian than the other states listed.

  Please insert identity verification probe.

https://itsfoss.com/news/illinois-age-verification-bill/

Working link

I assume this is so the paedophile president can stalk users by age, cause it definitely does nothing to protect kids

I don’t care about this issue because I don’t have kids /s

Valid in a weird way, I couldn’t let my kids online before they can hide from the government

One more gate to walk around

Good.

OS level age gating is the best possible solution. It means a parent can simply set an OS level account as a child’s and that’s it. No IDs, no verification process.