Tbh, this is just a massive stack of misguidedness.

First, look at what the original law does:

• OS needs to know the age.
• OS itself doesn't do anything with the age
• OS needs to provide the age to apps and services asking for it
• Apps and services need to block content based on the age provided with the OS
• If the OS doesn't provide an age, apps and services have to block as if the user was a toddler

Removing the requirement for the OS to provide an age doesn't change anything at all, because someone running an OS that doesn't provide an age will just be blocked everywhere. That's not a solution, that's a joke to appease idiots who don't know what the law does.

This is just as misguided as the backlash against systemd who added an age field to the user account to allow people to be still able to access age-restricted content.

The actually relevant part that people should be combatting is the requirement for apps and services to do age verification using the OS-provided age. The OS age field doesn't matter.