• mlfh@lm.mlfh.orgEnglish
    134·
    1 day ago

    I mean, it’s basically an optional gecos field. That feels a bit like writing off *nix as a whole because /etc/passwd has a place to put your phone number.

    • A Sharky Anthro@fedia.io
      168·
      1 day ago

      It always starts off as optional as a form of normalization…Then gradually the boundaries are pushed until we get in a worse situation. So, I won’t accept any form of age verification, optional or otherwise.

      • Lucy :3@feddit.orgEnglish
        72·
        1 day ago

        Yeah, with GECOS introducing the GECOS field, they normalized name verification, phone number verification, email address verification as well as location verification. So soon we should see those becoming mandatory and controlled.

        Oh wait, that was 64 years ago, so by now we should already be in literally 1984, actually?! Or is it that no one actually gives a fuck about a handful of programs trying to read user data that no one set, and if they set it, set it to a nonsencial/false value without any component verifying anything?

        The problem isn’t libraries adding more optional field to their capabilites, but management systems (such as a distros installer) making them mandatory against user will. That is what users should actually object to. No installer or component I know actually sets the location field. However, some are already planing to require the birth of date field, which is the actual start to pushing any boundaries. So start protesting there.

        Or, if you actually think that simple standards for how user data is stored is already malicious verification, your only option is probably, unironically, TempleOS, as even DOS stores user information, Country + TZ, available for other programs to fetch.

      • nialv7@lemmy.worldEnglish
        41·
        1 day ago

        i would agree if this isn’t open source. what you said is nearly impossible for open source software