“Most System76 employees installed operating systems and created accounts on their computer when they were under 18. They did this out of curiosity. Many started writing software. Some were already writing operating systems. I’m sure the story is similar at most tech companies. Limiting a child’s ability to explore what they can do with a computer limits their future. Removing user limitations to the computer (proprietary software, locked-down platforms like Android and iOS) is why System76 exists.

If there is any solace in these two laws, it’s that they don’t have any real restrictions. There is no actual age verification. Whoever installed the operating system or created the account simply says what age they are. They can lie. They will lie. They’re being encouraged to lie for fear of being restricted to a nerfed internet.

A parent that creates a non-admin account on a computer, sets the age for a child account they create, and hands the computer over is in no different state. The child can install a virtual machine, create an account on the virtual machine and set the age to 18 or over. It’s a similar technique to installing a VPN to get around the Great Firewall of China (just consider that for a moment). Or the child can simply re-install the OS and not tell their parents.

These laws put children in an awkward situation. They’re already scrunching up their faces (metro.co.uk/2026/01/15/…) to lie to social media age-verification algorithms required in Australia.

To the dark side

It can get worse. New York’s proposed Senate Bill (nysenate.gov/legislatio… requires adults to prove they’re adults to use a computer, exercise bike, smart watch, or car if the device is internet enabled with app ecosystems. The bill explicitly forbids self-reporting and leaves the allowed methods to regulations written by the Attorney General. Practical methods for a bill of such extreme breadth would require, in many instances, providing private information to a third-party just to use a computer at all. Privacy disappears.

In a bizarre twist, under its current wording, a Linux distribution downloaded from the internet could technically make the downloader the “device manufacturer”. They are the entity responsible for providing a freely distributed operating system to the device. In practice, this type of language is rarely enforced. Nonetheless, it highlights how laws written for centralized platforms like iOS and Android struggle to define who is responsible in open computing ecosystems where anyone can install or distribute the operating system.

Liberty has costs, but it’s worth it.”

Imagine if Bill Gates couldn't use a computer and start a company because of his age. You might be using a Microsoft product