What good?

Every single one of these steps are blatantly an attack on user freedom. The steps to unlocking the bootloader and install a different rom are not nearly as onerous. The only thing I will accept as reasonable, is a complete abandonment of this policy. Google has destroyed all trust I could have in it, and these weaselly worded concessions are based on a bullshit premise.

Remember, alien is also a term also applied to non-us citizen people.

Several issues, one OS developers will likely use this to fully identify all users. Apple, Google and Microsoft would rather have legal identities tied to all activity, and this is an easy pretext.

Second, there's no certainty about how courts might interpret compliance. If the intent of the law is to positively identify minors, a user editable field may not be interpreted as sufficient to comply. We don't know what the safe level of identification will be outside of trying the law in court. Who wants to be on the bad side of that?

And we will finally have the year of the Linux desktop!

Just as long as you're using a distro that isn't using systemd[0], which is kind of an uphill battle these days

[0]https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40954

It's a brute-force solution, for a problem with many simpler and limited solutions. This is being pushed so hard for it's intended side-effects. The goal is not to protect children, and it never has been. The goal is to eliminate anonymity on the internet

Exactly. Slowly the screws will be tightened, saying "oh the age gates are too loose" and will need ID verification, step by step.

This coordinated state level attack on the legislative process is crazy. These people can't seem to be bothered to do the basics of governing, but they always find time to do this cross-state nightmare fuel.

State government is always the worst for this sort of garbage legislation. The number of "economically-impactful" regulatory pages generated by state governments far outpaces the federal government in the US. And plenty of it is just corporate or influential NIMBY appeasement.

It is a fault in part in the government designed with bits and pieces of "honor system" and "well no one will ever do that!"; and the governed unable or unwilling to enact consequences.

Who pays for a Spotify subscription, to listen to out of copyright compositions, and recordings that probably can be found easily in the public domain? Might as well complain that TikTok has no feature length documentary films in IMAX.

I'd say that history has already established that this discrimination is likely as it has already occurred before.

Playing devil's advocate, but can you justify discriminating against an entire class of people, because of the actions of a subset? Part of the reason for protected classes is not to be reduced as an individual to the perception of the group.