upvote
True, however, that has been the case for quite a while. This particular incident doesn't change that, except for the VeraCrypt developer, who is in a crappy situation now (not just regarding VeraCrypt, he mentions he was using the certificate for his main job as well, so this sucks a lot for him).
reply
Well, of course. Have the other commercial offerings every been "truly open OSes"?
reply
So far I haven't had much concrete reason for my family to switch away from Windows. The updates maybe, needing to pay for a new license and the UI changes are like pulling the chair out from under them, especially as they get older (Windows 7 was hard for my grandma, thankfully they left 10 mostly alone but 11 is quite different again so she's currently staying on 10 — not that her hardware supports 11 anyway but that's fixable), but it's either learning the new Windows UI, let's say ten storypoints of newness, or learning some Linux desktop environment, even if it's Mint which is similar to 7/XP it's not quite the same either and probably like 15 storypoints at minimum, even if then you're done for much longer

But if OSes are being locked down and software has trouble distributing security updates through official repositories for Windows... that's a good reason to finally make the switch. Same as why my family is on Android: I can install f-droid, disable the google store, and don't have to worry about them installing malware / spyware / adware

There's different degrees of openness. Android till 2026 was an acceptable compromise (let's see how it goed forwards). Windows is also on the decline with their account policy, not sure about this certificate revocation thing (thankfully haven't had to deal with it yet; I'm not a user myself) but it sounds like they're moving to a walled garden also

When the degree changes and gets even less open, yeah you can say "well of course, they were never truly open, they're commercial" but it's still a change and might lead people to alter their choices

reply
You'll find that people that are not computer experts will take to modern Linux with much more ease than those that have complex needs, which for 90% of the people these days means that access to the Web satisfies all their needs. Moving from Windows 7 to 11 will probably be as traumatic as moving from Windows 11 to KDE, so it's an investment worth doing in my opinion.
reply
That's my expectation, but I've got a father who forces Microsoft products upon everyone for the reason that they're paid and industry standard and thus must be good (no, there is no argument possible; yes, it's worth the money even if mom touches spreadsheets less than once a year). I have the greatest trouble getting Libreoffice and Thunderbird to be a thing (since I can actually support that over the phone); Linux will be a whole 'nother challenge. He's quite full of himself and people eat it up, and free stuff that nerds use is definitely not on his prestige list

One day for sure though. They're slowly all getting old and asking more of me. Maybe when the current hardware generation needs replacing I'll give it a stab. Indeed, they need very little beyond a browser, Thunderbird (just because they're used to a local email client), a PDF reader (Evince/PdfJS have way fewer buttons and clutter and pop-ups than the Adobe crap), and some WYSIWYG editor compatible with the old doc(x) format (like Libreoffice). The time where local stores shipped photo-album-designer software are probably long gone, though I should double check beforehand

reply
While I agree entirely that Linux in 2026 has never been more usable… how much actual work is being put into Office and 365 tooling native on Linux?

Like none. Literally the best office you MIGHT KIND OF be able to run in 2016, but probably more like 2013.

Valve focused on games, that is awesome and really helpful…

But there are 10,000 distros and instead of putting real resources to put even rickety bridges over MS’s moat, no sorry, this team is making duplication-of-effort distro 10,001 which is now identical to thousands of others but the taskbar is in the middle of screen.

The people working on Linux are consistently uninterested in then things people would need to drop windows.

reply
> While I agree entirely that Linux in 2026 has never been more usable… how much actual work is being put into Office and 365 tooling native on Linux?

Why the hell would you want that? Office365 is a buggy piece of nightmare.

reply
Because even though you don’t like a thing, the entire world of business uses it.

Hold your nose and work on WINE if you need to think that way. But MS has moats, and office is one of the widest.

reply
I think business are going to be forced to change their thinking on this. Im not interesting in emulating windows progs in wine. I switched to Thunderbird a long time ago and other programs that give me the features I need with-out sacrificing my freedom.
reply
Thunderbird UI is absolute trash.

LibreOffice also has bad UI choices and glitches.

It’s not like we’re talking VLC vs OS Media Player here.

You can stomp your feet, but the world uses Exchange and Office and not for no reasons at all.

reply
Until Microsoft decides to no longer sign the Linux boot loader shim (for IBM/Red Hat, no less).
reply
In most cases you can put your computer secure boot in setup mode and roll your own keys.
reply
Until they making CA a requirement, then disable changing the CA settings and it defaults to Microsoft. Then you are fucked.
reply
That would make extremely inconvenient if MS ever need to revoke a certificate.
reply
Except compulsory age verification in Linux is now becoming a real threat. Some Linux distros are actively against this but many are not seemingly interested in fighting it: CachyOS, Ubuntu, Fedora and others.

Age Verification is the thin end of a much bigger wedge in "open" OS's

reply
Yes time to wake up.

I really believe most "open source" big projects have been compromised long ago. We have saw all those "Foundations" taking them over with all their governance, bureaucracy and goal which do not make any sense at the first look.

One example is Fedora, which is part of "The Digital Public Goods Alliance" [0], "a multi-stakeholder initiative that accelerates the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals by facilitating the discovery, development, use of, and investment in digital public goods."

The Digital Public Goods Alliance has about every governments as member plus all the usual suspects: Gate Foundation and co.

All the leaderships have usually no background or experience in open source or even computers but are just magically placed there. But you can't say anything because they are mostly women.

You read the goals and roadmaps of those foundations and find out it has nothing to do with software or open source. It is basically there to control those projects and then have them implement all the age verification, digital id, etc.

So yes this is not a surprise all those projects are now all in absurd features such as age verification.

- [0] https://www.digitalpublicgoods.net/

reply
Yes, all the code of conducts pushed onto open source projects, often by outside actors or novice contributors backed by a mob, has been mostly about replacing people who care about the projects with people who care more about following rules and will do what they will be told.
reply
I thought community projects (as opposed to the corporate Fedora and Ubuntu) are exempt from such laws.
reply
the current law requires no verification at all simple attestation, you could put in _any_ age. it also does not effect linux distros as a whole, only distros in jurisdictions with the laws.
reply
Sure, for now... I simply don't believe it will stop at "simple attestation", because we all know that simple attestation is practically useless, but once the various distros accept this "trivial" inconvenience, "Age verification 2" with harsher requirements will soon be on the way.

I would be ecstatic to be proved wrong on this, but experience tells me that is not likely to happen.

reply
We all know it's not about age, it's about user identity. As above, it's clearly a wedge so it's not rhetorical to observe more invasive and controlling features are coming.
reply
I wouldn't be surprised if it is being done to help microslop and AI companies lock in their profit margins.

Right now, if a handful of tech companies crater they'll take the whole world's financial systems out with them, so the government could easily be made complicit in any scheme they can conceive of to bolster their finances.

reply
Simple attestation is very useful for the case where a parent gives a child access to a computer and wants that computer to block porn. That's the use case everyone is clamoring for, and asking the root user "how old is this user?" solves it in a simple, open, privacy-preserving way. Everybody wins, except the teenager who wants to watch porn. If this were not legally mandated, everyone would support it as a useful feature, but since it is legally mandated, we have to get angry about it.
reply
This has got very little to do with children - that is just the excuse that sounds good. "Think of the children" is a rhetorical tactic that anyone who wants to get unfettered access to your data rolls out whenever they can. It is a tactic that unreasonable people use to influence reasonable people, because it is so difficult for a reasonable person to argue against without coming across as uncaring and/or bigoted.
reply
If it was an excuse to get your data there would be some data-getting involved. It may be hard for you to believe, but lots of people really do want parental controls that actually work and are bound by the force of law.
reply
This is likely the first step, and in itself is not much of a concern but only if it stops there, which it almost certainly will not. The next step, where the government argue that simple attestation is not secure enough to protect the children, and now we need to show a government ID is when the true damage starts.

This is a little like the joke: "Madam, would you sleep with me for 1 million dollars?", to which she replies "I would". "Madam, would you sleep with me for 1 dollar?", to which she replies, "Sir, what sort of woman do you think I am?" To which he replies "We have already established what sort of woman you are, now we are just trying to establish your price!"

By agreeing to this initial Age Verification, companies are establishing that they are willing to implement checks on age for their users, now we will see just how much more they are willing to do - all to protect the children of course.

reply
Yes that may be true, but parents are being misguided by efforts that are trying to control aspects of data.

If you, as a parent, make yourself open to this attack, you will find that you are making us less free of a society by expecting others to parent for you.

reply
If you oppose minimal, sensible parental controls, you open the door to whatever someone can jam down our throats that also happens to implement parental controls as a side effect.

If you oppose the law to force liquor stores to deny service to minors, but people are still upset about minors getting alcohol, you have no right to be surprised when the next proposal is to ban alcohol for everyone, and you have no right to be surprised if it passes.

reply
Worse, they are making society less free for their children - the parents themselves will be either dead or too old to care by the time the consequences are in full swing.
reply
If you think you are anyone can stop motivated teenagers from watching porn then I have a bridge to sell you. That is such an absurd goal that you really should be asking what the real motivations for this are.
reply
If you think you are anyone can stop motivated teenagers from getting alcohol then I have a bridge to sell you. That is such an absurd goal that you really should be asking what the real motivations for [forcing liquor stores not to serve minors] are.
reply
Literally the entire purpose of the law California passed, which Linux is responding to, is to preempt such laws: If someone says "we need identity verification because think of the kids looking at porn", it's now trivial to say "we already solved that problem, without deanonymizing everyone on the internet".
reply
That's how these things always go. No one is ever asked to build the whole thing, just provide one more brick.
reply