Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Government Linux

EFF, Ubuntu and Other Distros Discuss How to Respond to Age-Verification Laws (9to5linux.com) 168

Posted by EditorDavid from the NC-17-Linux dept.
System76 isn't the only one criticizing new age-verification laws. The blog 9to5Linux published an "informal" look at other discussions in various Linux communities. Earlier this week, Ubuntu developer Aaron Rainbolt proposed on the Ubuntu mailing list an optional D-Bus interface (org.freedesktop.AgeVerification1) that can be implemented by arbitrary applications as a distro sees fit, but Canonical responded that the company does not yet have a solution to announce for age declaration in Ubuntu. "Canonical is aware of the legislation and is reviewing it internally with legal counsel, but there are currently no concrete plans on how, or even whether, Ubuntu will change in response," said Jon Seager, VP Engineering at Canonical. "The recent mailing list post is an informal conversation among Ubuntu community members, not an announcement. While the discussion contains potentially useful ideas, none have been adopted or committed to by Canonical."

Similar talks are underway in the Fedora and Linux Mint communities about this issue in case the California Digital Age Assurance Act law and similar laws from other states and countries are to be enforced. At the same time, other OS developers, like MidnightBSD, have decided to exclude California from desktop use entirely.
Slashdot contacted Hayley Tsukayama, Director of State Affairs at EFF, who says their organization "has long warned against age-gating the internet. Such mandates strike at the foundation of the free and open internet."

And there's another problem. "Many of these mandates imagine technology that does not currently exist." Such poorly thought-out mandates, in truth, cannot achieve the purported goal of age verification. Often, they are easy to circumvent and many also expose consumers to real data breach risk.

These burdens fall particularly heavily on developers who aren't at large, well-resourced companies, such as those developing open-source software. Not recognizing the diversity of software development when thinking about liability in these proposals effectively limits software choices — and at a time when computational power is being rapidly concentrated in the hands of the few. That harms users' and developers' right to free expression, their digital liberties, privacy, and ability to create and use open platforms...

Rather than creating age gates, a well-crafted privacy law that empowers all of us — young people and adults alike — to control how our data is collected and used would be a crucial step in the right direction.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EFF, Ubuntu and Other Distros Discuss How to Respond to Age-Verification Laws More

EFF, Ubuntu and Other Distros Discuss How to Respond to Age-Verification Laws

Comments Filter:
  • Think of the children! Well, as we know from the Epstein files, each and every one in our leadership does think about children a lot. I'm not sure we should trust ours to them, though, legislatively, or literally for that matter.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      all the dead ones from the Iranian terror regime? or the Ukrainian ones kidnapped by Putin to replenish his stocks?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by znrt ( 2424692 )

      for the emperor(s)!!

    • Re:Think of the children! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @07:48AM (#66030840)
      Newsome himself said the law was poorly written but he signed it anyway because anyone who doesn't is going to get ripped to pieces in elections with think of the children bullshit.

      I don't know what you do with a voting electorate that is so low information and has so little critical thinking skills that they can't see why this is a problem and that would be vulnerable to attack ads launched against politicians over voting against the law of this bad.

      Bottom line we need smarter voters

      • Seems to be the voters have become an universal excuse to not do the right thing.

        "I don't want to sign this thing, but voters won't like me not signing it."

        "Universal healthcare is a good idea, but voters don't like it."

        Voters don't like minimum wage, student loan forgiveness, the social safety net, well, it seems, the voters maybe don't like the way the US is right now, but most importantly, supposedly, they decisevly and categorically reject any improvement to anything.

        Or maybe the politicians do what the

        • Re:Think of the children! (Score:4, Interesting)

          by AleRunner ( 4556245 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @08:48AM (#66030914)

          Or maybe the politicians do what they want, invent whatever half-plausible excuses to cover their asses, and if they can find a way to blame the voters for their own doing, well that would be the cherry on top.

          Both can be true. Politicians do what they want on the narrow set of issues they care specifically about (for whatever reason, both wish to do good and total corruption). For most other issues they do what they think will get them the power to deal with the issues they care about. To fix the problem you need to fix both the voters and the politicians.

          There are a bunch of political memes out there ("uniparty", "they're all the same", "all politicians are corrupt" etc) which get pushed hard specifically in order to break the voters by making them think they are powerless and it isn't worth voting.

          • Re:Think of the children! (Score:5, Interesting)

            by korgitser ( 1809018 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @09:48AM (#66031046)

            Calling things memes is a meme, too. How many DC critters do we have that did not party with Epstein? And if we should find some that did not, have any of them taken a stand against any of it, or are they but mere enablers? Is it then a stretch to call them all pedophiles?

            According to this study from Cambridge https://doi.org/10.1017/S15375... [doi.org] voter preference has no correlation with policy outcomes in the US. But money does. To rephrase it in the context of your post, politicians only care about the issues people with money have. And that's not really a surprise. The primary concern of getting power is getting financed to run your campaigns. The financing does not come from the voters. So your actual campaign is made to secure donor support, and you do that by promising, and having a track record of, working for their interests. Once you have the finances, you use them to create and advertise messaging you think will resonate with the voters. But as the study shows, that resonance of messaging does not translate into policy outcomes for the voters.

            My call is that far from making voters powerless, admitting problems is the first step towards solving them. Thus, the most important empowering there is.

            • Calling things memes is a meme, too.

              Yes, but a useful one. Meme has a quite well defined meaning and once you understand it you can see the modern media environment more clearly.

              How many DC critters do we have that did not party with Epstein? And if we should find some that did not, have any of them taken a stand against any of it, or are they but mere enablers? Is it then a stretch to call them all pedophiles?

              The vote to release the Epstein files succeeded. Even if we discount some of the supporters hoping to damage their opponents (on both sides), that's still a pretty reasonable sign.

              Beyond that, I'd probably call lots of them "pedophile supporters", however, I'd always remember the way in which accusations of sexual impropriety and assault have become useless through ov

          • If you take culture wars out of the mix, Republicans and Democrats act strikingly similar, especially on foreign policy. It's why the US government , under most presidents, will have some kind of armed conflict that we are participating in. We cry when the other party goes globe trotting, but we cry less when it's our color asshole doing it. With that said, I know people from both parties that are for this conflict in Iran and those that are against.

            Almost as if people are not just defined by their party an

            • Foreign policy: It's 90% in the Arabian-area countries because OIL=Money!
              The rest was in Africa (and into Arabian land because terrorists... how'd that work out in Iraq after 9/11's false flag operation) and Japan (WWII) and Germany (also WWII) (and then, there was the Civil War, various _littler_ (I said LITTLER, compared to the others I listed (in size, not in impact)) battles against Native Americans).
              We feel the need to police the rest of the world because (aside from oil) "America knows best".
              The ones

        • Seems to be the voters have become an universal excuse to not do the right thing.

          You seem to be missing a CENTRAL concept at work here....

          The politicians WORK FOR the voters.....

          The politicians are there to do the will of the voters....

          Geez, do we not teach civics any longer in our schools in the US?

          • I mean, sure, in theory. I think it's pretty clear to see that in reality, they work for themselves and they do this by helping those with money in hopes they can get re-elected.

          • > The politicians WORK FOR the voters.....

            Yes

            > The politicians are there to do the will of the voters....

            No.

            The politicians are there to work in the best interests of the voters. The fact something is popular doesn't mean it should be done.

            I am very against rule-by-plebiscite, and what you're proposing is only one step away from that. The country ends up run by the charismatic and whoever owns the media if remove good judgement from those making the decisions from the system.

          • It rarely happens that the school curriculum is up to date. Back in the days of the New Deal, a lot of the politicians did indeed work for the voters, but...

            When Clinton shipped the jobs overseas, I guess he was working for the voters. When Bush ushered in the surveillance and eternal war era, I guess he was working for the voters. When Obama saved the banks instead of the voters in the economic crisis, and went on a bombing spree, I guess he was working for the voters. When Trump gave the rich the biggest

          • Most likely, not... they don't teach real math any more.

            You mean... "they are supposed to work for the Electoral College voters, unless working for them doesn't line the right people's pockets or accomplish the goal of instilling the US' version of Democracy into some other country or securing more oil or acting as global police forces or access to cheap something".
            Me and you and everyone else who isn't working for the WH, we're normal people... our vote doesn't mean crap... that College decides who sits in

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Tom ( 822 )

        I don't know what you do with a voting electorate that is so low information and has so little critical thinking skills that they can't see why this is a problem and that would be vulnerable to attack ads launched against politicians over voting against the law of this bad.

        You put them on ships and send them to some backwater continent an ocean away.

        Oh wait. We did that already.

      • Bottom line we need smarter voters

        Not going to happen (unless you add a new literacy test at the polling place). You go to the polls with the voters you have, not the ones you wish you had.

      • Newsom also said he wasn't going to run for president and he already can't run for governor so which thing is he lying about? We know he's lying because he's talking. Newsom is not as big as piece of shit as Trump but it's not for lack of trying

      • "law of this bad"? (so low information and has so little critical thinking skills... sounds like an internal reflection)
        You could also use some punctuation, there.

        You do realize what you or I vote doesn't actually amount to anything beyond waste of paper, right? The Electoral College decides that... was the other option better? Express lane immigration?
        "Attack ads"... isn't that a normal thing every election cycle? "He wants to do this, he spoke out against that... vote for me!"

  • Don't standardise! (Score:5)

    by kevin lyda ( 4803 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @04:07AM (#66030650) Homepage

    This is one time I think every distro should do it a totally different way.

    • While I appreciate the sentiment, I don't appreciate that a non-standard solution would result in countless development hours being wasted. The stupid part really is: This shouldn't be up to the OS. And OS does not need parental controls, and application may. Leave it up to the application.

      • Leave it up to the application.

        If we leave it up to the application we will have to fix it in all the applications. If this is done in a library in the OS, we can just fix it with a simple substitution of a library that says "yes", no matter what.

        • If we leave it up to the application we will have to fix it in all the applications. If this is done in a library in the OS, we can just fix it with a simple substitution of a library that says "yes", no matter what.

          As long as we have control over what is spat out then sure, but how long before the laws are amended to make sure we don't?

        • What's the actual use at OS level, almost no application requires age verification. As this is only for one or two states, just ignore the states, they can't do anything about it as it will take years to get all OSses to support this and incorporate. People are still using windows7/8/10 or older linux distro's which will never get an update for that.

      • While I appreciate the sentiment, I don't appreciate that a non-standard solution would result in countless development hours being wasted. The stupid part really is: This shouldn't be up to the OS. And OS does not need parental controls, and application may. Leave it up to the application.

        Current OSs do have parental controls. Be it Windows, macOS, (not sure about Linux or BSD). Essentially, a parent/guardian would create an account for a minor to use for whatever s/he's allowed to use it for - studies, games,....

        I don't think OSs should have to monitor whether a kid creates a VM in which to do illicit things. It's up to the parent/guardian to ensure that there are no hypervisors installed on that computer

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dwywit ( 1109409 )

        I want to know how to set and prove the identity and age of "Administrator"

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Basically the only option is to make it illegal to circumvent even the most basic mechanism and then throw any kid that does in jail. Yep, that will help.

  • What is the purpose of these laws again? Has it been definitly proven that social media is bad for kids?

    I don't belive it has, there have been studies suggesting it is bad, and other studies that find very little effect. Personally I don't think there's enough evidence to make a conculsion but I do know that passing laws based on moral panics is a very bad thing, and that appears to be what's going on. Also it's very obvious the laws aren't just about keeping kids healthy but also about surveillance, contro

    • They are the first step toward a slippery slope toward a ban on anonymity.

      • Re:I've lost the plot on these laws (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Tom ( 822 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @06:40AM (#66030804) Homepage Journal

        They are the first step toward a slippery slope toward a ban on anonymity.

        It's much more than a slippery slope. It's an intentional trap. Politicians have been trying to remove anonymity from the Internet from basically the time their kids first told them about it. Nothing has been more consistent than these constant attempts, usually under the typical "protect the chiiiiildren" guise.

        Mind you, the same type of people crying "protect the children" are the type of people who visited Epstein island.

        • Mind you, the same type of people crying "protect the children" are the type of people who visited Epstein island.

          At the front, sure, but behind them are quite likely the people who never visited Epstein island because they knew exactly what it was and were using that as a way and controlling and blackmailing the people who did visit the island. For example, we know very clearly that Russian secret services had direct involvement with Epstein.

        • Politicians have been trying to remove anonymity from the Internet from basically the time their kids first told them about it.

          Why does this remind me of Krikkit?

      • Re:I've lost the plot on these laws (Score:5, Insightful)

        by AleRunner ( 4556245 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @08:58AM (#66030930)

        They are the first step toward a slippery slope toward a ban on anonymity.

        I hate to be a doomsayer, but it's actually even worse than that. The ban on anonymity is a step towards a ban on effective security. This comes from the same people as did the "clipper" chip where all encryption would be done in government controlled hardware and allow them to break it as needed, with the side effect that state level enemy governments could also do it.

        Already in the UK, there are moves to regulate and ban VPNs that allow you to maintain security against the age verification systems.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by rskbrkr ( 824653 )
          They won't be able to ban VPNs. Even China doesn't ban foreigners from using VPNs because that would stop a huge percentage of foreign business travel to China.

          • They won't be able to ban VPNs.

            There will be government approved VPNs which will allow traffic monitoring and age verification. Age verification is already being proposed for those VPNs that take money from the UK. Then they gradually add more and more rules.

            Even China doesn't ban foreigners from using VPNs because that would stop a huge percentage of foreign business travel to China.

            No, but they do it for their own citizens. Once other countries have banned, they will likely be able to extend their ban.

    • I agree, saying social media is bad for kids is oversimplifying. Social media is bad for everyone.

    • What is the purpose of these laws again? Has it been definitly proven that social media is bad for kids?

      I don't belive it has, there have been studies suggesting it is bad, and other studies that find very little effect. Personally I don't think there's enough evidence to make a conculsion but I do know that passing laws based on moral panics is a very bad thing, and that appears to be what's going on. Also it's very obvious the laws aren't just about keeping kids healthy but also about surveillance, control and monetization of adults.

      https://www.theguardian.com/co... [theguardian.com]

  • Been there, done that. EU citizen here. Duh.

    It's always hilarious and/or super-annoying when people who don't have the faintest idea on how computers or digital networks work attempt to make laws to regulate these. We have this problem in the EU and in Germany quite a bit. Accidental throught-crime laws, laws that factually prohibit reading or consuming media you own, that collide with fundamental constitutional rights etc. without the lawmakers even noticing.

    By and large it does get better though. The EU G

  • Law of unintended consequences (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @04:56AM (#66030694)
    Don't build the OS installer or images in California and ensure that the pipelines are sufficiently distributed to counter any brain damaged legislation elsewhere in future. And make a big song and dance about how California used to be the home of Linux but is no longer because of stupid unenforceable laws.
    • I always thought Finland was the home of Linux.

    • Don't build the OS installer or images in California

      Because this is a California only problem? If you think that you clearly haven't been watching the trends (nationally or internationally) on this topic. Once can easily ignore one state, but at what point do you run out of the ability to ignore? 1 state? 5? 20?. How many countries? Multiple have age verificaiton laws already.

      We need to abort this before we give birth to this monster. California of all places should be on board with this.

      • Re:Law of unintended consequences (Score:4, Funny)

        by Kernel Kurtz ( 182424 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @03:29PM (#66031914)

        Don't build the OS installer or images in California

        Because this is a California only problem? If you think that you clearly haven't been watching the trends (nationally or internationally) on this topic. Once can easily ignore one state, but at what point do you run out of the ability to ignore? 1 state? 5? 20?. How many countries? Multiple have age verificaiton laws already.

        We need to abort this before we give birth to this monster. California of all places should be on board with this.

        I think the solution is to simply alllow Linux (and *BSD, etc) to become illegal to use in all those places. That problem will fix itself quickly I suspect.

  • There is this obsession that a technical solution is either perfect or useless with nothing in between.

    The problem for open source software is that I am legally allowed by copyright law + GPL license to modify the code implementing this. But there may be other laws. âoeAny software must either make a good effort to verify the age, or reply that the age cannot be verified. âoe.

  • CA (Score:2)

    by HnT ( 306652 )

    Somehow, nowadays all the bad stuff seems to come from California, or Washington..

  • There's a thread on reddit about the versions of this [reddit.com].

    Meta seems to be the big sponsor behind these bills. In the long run, by tossing this on the OS, they can say they did everything right, it's the fault of the computer, not them.

    Lots of it is all over the place, but we're seeing several copy pasted pieces of legislation all over the country. We're probably going to see a bigger push, both at the national and local level depending on where they find the most success.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they start p

  • Oh, right. That is all they are doing. Thinking that its someone other than the parents responsibility to watch over their children.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by HiThere ( 15173 )

      In working societies, it has always been more than just the parents responsibility to watch over the children. This is true even among baboons, must less early hominids. The idea that this was not true is farcial.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Revek ( 133289 )
        What is farcical is that its not the responsibility of the parent. I didn't expect anyone else to make sure my kids were not exposed to predators of all varieties. Including digital ones. The parents are completely on hundred percent responsible but take no responsibility in this. Instead they demand some magic bullet where their efforts should be to fix this largely imagined problem.
    • Did your parents follow you around as a teenager to make sure you weren't drinking beer and looking at playboy magazines? No? Those lazy bastards!

  • I guess that would create a rather spectacular fail for the idiots behind this.

    Incidentally, the Japanese have a well-working solution without all this nonsense and privacy invasion. Of course that does involve the parents.

    • That's what Midnight BSD did, as the above blurb mentions: they've just edited their T&C to state that that OS is not valid for use in California. They can soon add Colorado as well

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Indeed. It will be interesting to see whether this holds up in court. Obviously the course cannot force them to make it even available in California, but how far can they go actually forcing non-availability?

        All this well-meaning stupidity has effects that are darker and darker every day.

  • Based on how many of the servers run Linux on the internet, how's that going to work?
    Age of the server itself? Age of the person setting it up? What about connections incoming? Does that require age verification?
    What if they decide based on age of data? That's certainly a lag from hell if it takes 16/18 years just to load a web page.

    The knock-on effects of this go way further than just desktops and most things, Not only would Apple charge extra to include this by upping the price of their computers, what ha

  • Refuse (Score:3)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @10:05AM (#66031084) Homepage
    Just refuse. Modify your T&C to prohibit usage in jurisdictions that require age verification. Then enforce it. Let's see how well the US tech industry works without Linux.

    • M$ will love windows server only with min cores (min size is higher then some cups so you are forced to over buy) and that is per socket as well. Per host.

      • Yeah, but will users agree to use them? What about people who decide to get around this by using variations of Tiny11?

        • Core licenses are sold in packs of two (each pack contains two licenses), and packs of 16 (each pack contains 16 licenses).

          When licensing is based on physical cores, each processor needs to be licensed with a minimum of eight core licenses. Each physical server, including single-processor servers, needs to be licensed with a minimum of 16 core licenses. One core license must be assigned for each physical core on the server. Additional cores can then be licensed in increments of

    • That'll be tough with GPL'd operating systems like GNU/Linux where the license of the code they're using prevents that.

      The easier way is just not to do business in California. If someone downloads the operating system in a way that doesn't include any commercial transaction, that's on them, not you.

      TBH I think this affects companies like Canonical and IBM RedHat more than it affects Debian or other community-maintained OSes. There's no-one to sue or drag to court in the case of the latter.

      I also think ther

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rskbrkr ( 824653 )

        The easier way is just not to do business in California. If someone downloads the operating system in a way that doesn't include any commercial transaction, that's on them, not you.

        CA recently sued two out of state parties for providing codes for 3D printed firearms. The state has no evidence that either of the parties does any business in CA. Not doing business will not preclude CA from making your life difficult.

      • ""Is the user older than 18?" is acceptable "Is the user older than 18 yet? What about now? What about now? What about now?" is not. "What is the user's age?" is not. "What is the user's name?" is not. THAT would be a HUGE improvement on the status quo because the status quo is "Upload your driver's license and let us use a web cam and some AI bullshit" which is inherently anti-privacy." The number "18" shouldn't be used nowhere either. A kid should be able to prove with their iPhone that they are not six

  • chris hansen sting Defense in court may be bad for the state.

    When the defense says the API said that user was over 18/21 so that my client did not chat with an under age person.

  • All the billionaires in California wouldn't even use Linux in the first place.

    • I have a hunch that most of the billionaires in California use macs. Will Apple comply w/ this?

  • And ignore it. Let them try to enforce it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sloppy ( 14984 )

      Unless it's found unconstitutional, enforcing it is going to be super-easy. CA sues Ubuntu, Ubuntu becomes liable for infinite money. Business destroyed. Goal achieved.

  • Don't allow downloads, installation or running of OSes in states that have passed these retarded ass laws. Let the states see the massive mistake they've made when they can't get access to modern tech anymore.
    • Also no development in these states. Those who want to continue to commit to open source OSes might want to start making relocation plans.

      • Most of the OSs in question are already developed in Colorado, and some in California. So they'd have to start making relocation plans

        Maybe OSs can have 2 versions - one for jurisdictions that have age verification requirements, and another for ones that don't.

    • What if somebody uses a VPN that places his computer in a state w/ laws different from the state he's in?

  • When you really want to fsck something up... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lew Pitcher ( 68631 ) on Monday March 09, 2026 @01:29PM (#66031502) Homepage

    you leave it to the "big" Linux distros.

    While I abhor this sort of state-mandated intrusion, I note that classical Unix and Linux systems already have most of the mechanism in place to comply with the law.

    The classic Unix /etc/passwd file maintains a "gecos" field, originally used to co-ordinate unix users with their GE GECOS development environment counterparts, but now mostly used to record ancilliary information about the user (full name, home phone number, room number, etc.) and the chfn(1) utility to manipulate this information.

    It would seem trivial for this gecos field to record birthdate, needing only a change to the chfn(1) utility, and a redefinition or expansion of the "other" component of gecos field. The query api is already well-defined: getpwent(3) passes the entire gecos field (as pw_gecos) to the caller. The rest would be up to the applications that require age verification.

    Note, like all other solutions, there is no way to prevent the falsification of birthdate at account creation.

    I'm glad I don't live in California.

  • ... if it's done right, of course.

    But then again, I also implemented time restrictions on my children's accounts with a cron job that killed all their processes at bedtime. And I insisted that, as a condition of being able to play Roblox, they had to "friend" me and their siblings in the game. (But Roblox doesn't even support Linux. grumble, grumble...)

  • Allowing root to set an age for an user which can then be communicated/attested for applications does not verify an user age.

    If there is no verification of actual age, I think it would be better to call them mandatory parental control support laws.

  • Rather than creating age gates, a well-crafted privacy law that empowers all of us — young people and adults alike — to control how our data is collected and used would be a crucial step in the right direction.

    This isn't about "data collection," it's about limiting access to harmful images, writings by people with under-developed brains. Yes, "Rah, rah! Free Speech!" but can't we agree that letting a 12 year-old access what has been prviously classified as "adult material" is not a great idea?

    I can appreciate the intention, but I question the method - these laws are almost literally unenforceable.

    I remember an instance 10-15 years ago there were disturbing, bloody images of children that were hurt/maimed/killed i

  • When people confuse computers with the internet. Age-gating a computer is not age-gating the Internet! Believe it or not - you can do a lot with computers without getting online.

  • How appropriate can a cookie be? This one came up at the bottom of the page just below this article: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary saftey deserve neither liberty not saftey." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
    (The misspelling in the cookie is not mine.)

    This is no more about "the children" than it is about the number of craters on the Moon on July 17th 1897 at 12:37 CET. It is about grabbing personal identifying material - in violation of minor things like HIPPA.

    {^_^}

  • Complying would make people less safe. This is pure totalitarian bullshit imposed by the Epstein class.

Slashdot Top Deals

An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.

Close