Corngood

Every app does not need to check your birth date. An app will be able to query if the user is within one of a few broad ranges of age (e.g. under 18), but an app only has to do that if it needs to comply with some other legislation.

The California law essentially allows a parent to create a child account on a device and gives a way for apps to query it. I’m not sure what PH is asking for, but it doesn’t sound like the same thing.

The California law doesn’t require age verification, just a setting on the account that e.g. a parent can set. It’s still stupid, but it’s not what apple is supposedly doing here.

Google already refuse signing releases for GrapheneOS on the pixel. Do you mean how you get a special boot screen implying you’re doing something sketchy? Google signing things is not something we want. We want phones that don’t care if your OS is signed by Google, and banking apps that trust you to pick an OS.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Safety_Amendment#Pla… …gov.au/…/which-platforms-are-age-restricted eSafety does not have a formal role in declaring which services are age-restricted social media platforms. In the absence of any rules made by the Minister of Communications specifying a service is either an age-restricted social media platform or not an age-restricted social media platform, any determination that a service is or is not an age-restricted social media platform is a matter for the court. Services which do not currently meet the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’ should routinely self-assess, including when introducing a new social feature or function or when observing changes in the ways existing and new account holders are using their service. So technically they need to self-assess based on the legislation, but based on the published lists I really doubt they have anything to worry about.