logoalt Hacker News

lrvickyesterday at 10:41 PM1 replyview on HN

If they are successful at doing so, then those distribution methods were too brittle.

I expect in response one of the maintainers outside US jurisdiction of their own volition publishes via bittorrent, tor hidden services, and embedding blobs in public blockchains with no help from me.

Then the problem the legislators sought to solve just got a lot worse, while calling a lot of attention to how little power they actually have to control decentralized FOSS software projects.

Of course another point of the project is building the entire thing from source code with deterministic results only takes a few hours. For many, this would be faster than downloading artifacts.

It is not needed for maintainers to publish binaries at all. Publishing signatures on the expected hashes would suffice at worst.


Replies

kube-systemyesterday at 11:04 PM

The person you replied to is using "could"/"could not" to mean "would comply with the law"/"would not comply with the law"

Nobody here is saying that anyone is going to swoop in and physically prevent this software from being distributed on the internet.

> Then the problem the legislators sought to solve just got a lot worse, while calling a lot of attention to how little power they actually have to control decentralized FOSS software projects.

The legislators who passed this don't give a shit about that. Their intended target of this legislation is mainstream devices and mainstream users.

show 1 reply