FYI, in your reproduction, both of the conditionals are the same. But you are right, the initial implementation was `!=`

    while [[ $SECONDS != $1 ]]; do

became

    while [[ $SECONDS -lt $1 ]]; do

>.< idk why I copy pasted my line with the correction again. Sorry about that, but glad you got it despite that haha

Didn't Brother start pulling this same stuff? I recall hearing something along those lines and blocking mine from talking to the Internet.

I bought one recently and I don't have any problems.

Brother is just so much more consumer friendly. They release drivers for new operating systems compatible with the oldest machines, etc etc.

HP is like... Microsoft released a new version of Windows or Apple released a new version or MacOS. Your printer is no longer compatible buy a new one.

A slippery slope is only a fallacy if there is no demonstrated history of it existing. I think we're all aware that that is not the case for surveillance laws.

Can you explain what you find complicated about sops? I've used it with ease for the last two years, both personally and professionally.

> You continue to use it for something else? How is it different from any other default shortcut you don't line and change?

The author points out that Apple defaults often don't allow you to reuse them. They talk pretty far in the article about how that can't map globe+H to a different function. So, this theoretical is about them not being able to continue using their combination for what they want at Apple's whims.

Blocking keybinds is from a different section of the article

It also applies to application providers. The law requires them to have their applications ask the OS how old the user is whenever it is downloaded and launched.

Two important definitions that might surprise people:

(a) (1) “Account holder” means an individual who is at least 18 years of age or a parent or legal guardian of a user who is under 18 years of age in the state.

(a) (2) “Account holder” does not include a parent of an emancipated minor or a parent or legal guardian who is not associated with a user’s device.

(i) “User” means a child that is the primary user of the device.

User is the most surprising here. It really should just be minors, or non-emancipated minors. Further, I think there are interesting ways the definition of account holder and user combined play out in interpreting the rest of the law.

Colorado is trying to copy this law right now, too.

As others have pointed out, this is just a foot in the door. There's also a part of the law this article doesn't cover that requires EVERY application to query this information on every launch, regardless of whether or not the application has any age related limitations.

The language I found was:

> when the application is downloaded and launched

So it looks like the law only requires it on first launch. Which makes sense if the application can only be run from that one account. Apps that can be launched from multiple accounts are not singled out in the law, but the spirt of the law would have you checking what account is launching the app and are they in the correct age range.

That's not a guarantee. It's up to how the courts interpret that and. Given that this law is meant to handle a moving target like age, I fully expect them to interpret it as its disjunctive form.

The term "application" is explicitly defined in the bill and has a far narrower scope than just the word "application" on it's own means.

Far narrower is doing a lot of heavy lifting in your response.

> (c) “Application” means a software application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application.

If your device can connect to a covered application store, every application on your computer must follow this.

I think that OP's point was that the alternative is even more locked down. There is no option for people who don't want to be nannied.