Post #551014
2026-03-06 11:55 UTC
There is no hard definition within the laws so this is all speculation. This means that there is no technical answer because the question in is core is a legal one.
Your TV for example can have a browser without problems.
You can have an integrated board that runs a full Linux without you being able to touch the underlying OS and let that start a browser, too.
You know those tv screens that show you traffic into it flight plans at the airport? Those are often full Linux computers set up exactly like that.
In short: we’ll only know when the law is actually being tested. It’s written in a way that I as layman could talk and software and even most hardware into it’s definition, it’s absolute bullshit…
Replies (2)
-
@emotional_soup_88__dup_21417@programming.dev 2026-03-06 12:07
Right. Would you say then, that trying to preemptively circumvent a yet untested law is a waste of resources and time? As in, it’s better to wait and see how authorities and courts will handle and implement the law?
-
@Oinks@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2026-03-07 10:01
Most TVs are probably already compliant because using them requires creating a Google or Apple account, which already want your age information (and the California bill explicitly allows using existing data like this IIRC). That’s good for avoiding disruption, but not so good from a privacy perspective.