Did you read it? It does neither of those things. It establishes that Meta is fighting to amend these regulatory bills to push onus onto operating systems and Discord isn’t named once in the OP.

Your username is appropriate.

From rfk: “Rep. Kim Carver (R-Bossier City), the sponsor of Louisiana's HB-570, publicly confirmed that a Meta lobbyist brought the legislative language directly to her. “

That’s more than fighting to amend. I’m not sure where I got the discord connection but I thought it was from that link. I’ve read a few things on this subject recently so I may have mixed up two different sources.

Obviously Discord is related. I can simultaneously support age constraints and also *not want my child’s 18th birthday leaked under any circumstances*.

Ehh. In the last corporate PR nightmare I was witness to internally we absolutely tracked return subscribers in our fallout dashboard.

From the second paragraph:

> And the only way to prove that you checked is to keep the data indefinitely.

This is not true and made me immediately stop reading. If a social media app uses a third party vendor to do facial/ID age estimation, the vendor can (and in many cases does) only send an estimated age range back to the caller. Some of the more privacy invasive KYC vendors like Persona persist and optionally pass back entire government IDs, but there are other age verifiers (k-ID, PRIVO, among others) who don't. Regulators are happy with apps using these less invasive ones and making a best effort based on an estimated age, and that doesn't require storing any additional PII. We really need to deconflate age verification from KYC to have productive conversations about this stuff. You can do one thing without doing the other.

If you don't keep and cross-reference documents it is really easy to circumvent, e.g. by kids asking their older siblings to sign them up.

I don't think a bulletproof age verification system can be implemented on the server side without serious privacy implications. It would be quite easy to build it on the client side (child mode) but the ones pushing for these systems (usually politicians) don't seem to care about that.

Yep, it is easy to circumvent, and the silver lining of all of this is that regulators don't care. They care that these companies made an effort in guessing.

From the article

> Palantir is working on a tool for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that populates a map with potential deportation targets, brings up a dossier on each person, and provides a “confidence score” on the person’s current address, 404 Media has learned. ICE is using it to find locations where lots of people it might detain could be based.

Is ICE using a general purpose app for surveillance or is Palantir making a deportation-centric app for ICE?

Correction: 31% of the eligible voting population and ~50% of the popular vote. A lot of people did not vote.

Thank you, that is an important point. Voting numbers can only estimate the totals.

I should have use the term *Electorate*.

  The collective people of a country, state, or electoral district who are entitled to vote.

And they too are getting exactly what they asked for by not voting.