The Texas law also seems like it's currently held up in court; Also Idaho did no pass a "App Store Accountability Act", it was Louisiana.
They are also slightly different in that they only cover "mobile devices" but still a potential issue for some alternative stores like F-Droid etc.
Oh you are right just checked; seems like I confused a draft for an actual law.
The need for parental controls isn't that new.
On device parental controls are commonly used as a talking point against forcing ID verification online even by privacy groups.
France and Spain already have requirements afaik. Texas, Utah and Idaho as well.
I think this one would be a good starting point: gitlab.freedesktop.org/pwithnall/malcontent
I just find it strange that I read this all over social media now.
The California bill has already passed in October and Texas, Utah, Louisiana should already be in effect right now.
Apple recently also started requiring ID checks for apps in Australia, Singapore, and Brazil.
At least California has in the past blocked the bills that require actual ID verification on websites.
The Texas bill to me seems the most invasive although got through without much attention. However it is apparently on hold due to a preliminary injunction.
In fact I think there is a explicit mention somewhere that a simple age or date of birth entry field during setup is enough.
The Texas bill does require a "commercially viable method" while it's only hitting mobile devices could still hit alternative app stores.
I've read the Colorado and California bills, they don't explicitly mention that the age check has to be foolproof. They basically just want a way for parents to lock out their kids if they want to.
Meanwhile the same bills in Texas, Utah, Louisiana are already in effective.
And yes I hate that this is the case. Not just for privacy reasons but it does make self hosting also a pain.
But overall it's the politicians that have to take the blame for this not just Discord.
We have known since at least 2022 that this is likely to be coming with the talks about KOSA.
Discord is of course not blameless. Pushing this out globally even where not required while also planning an IPO and "experimenting" with Persona (one of the worst options in terms of privacy) is entirely their fault. 🧵
With the EU's DSA also expected to start enforcement I bet this year we will see more sites doing this.
Alternatives to Discord also aren't safe like Matrix .org also mentioned:
matrix.org/blog/2026/02...
🧵
There are multiple laws that require this in the US, UK, EU Australia etc.
Some are only targeting porn sites, others are more generically targeting teen-inappropriate content or even social media in general. 🧵
I see a ton of people commenting how Discord keeps pushing age verification even if they delay or change provider.
While I get that this is a stupid invasion of privacy, it's not entirely Discords fault; and how things are going you aren't safe on other platforms. 🧵
Even Element (who runs the matrix .org servers) said that they will have to follow AV laws and I think they designated their service as 18+ in the UK.
Not sure how long other alternatives can keep this issue away.
Not just U.S. and U.K.; There is also Australia having generic social media ban below 16 requiring AV; Germany requires AV for NSFW content since early 2000s & France recently followed suite; And with the DSA starting enforcement at some point this year it will also not become easier.
The logo of the "Keep Android Open" campaign is an Android robot dressed as Darth Vader. Across the top it says "I AM ALTERING THE DEAL" in all caps, and below the robot it says "Pray I don't alter it further". This is a reference to how Android acquired a massive catalog of apps be making access open to the platform back in the day, and Google assuring it would remain open, as opposed to the iOS platform which was (and still is) very restricted. And, of course, Star Wars.
KDE supports the "Keep Android Open" campaign
#Google will cut off independent developers to #Android if they do not register with Google first. This will kill independent platforms like @fdroidorg.bsky.social and severely impede FLOSS devs from creating apps for Android.
keepandroidopen.org
Or at least that's the official reasons for those laws, not like anyone has ever been de-banked unfairly ... /s
Anyway I know those requirements are relatively old compared to the AV laws but they got tighter after all those crypto scams.
Yeah I just mentioned the generic term KYC/AML is a generic term used to put many laws under one umbrella.
E.g. Taxation, money laundering, scam prevention, anti terror/war financing, sanction lists and so on ....
Different laws that often require verified customer records.
"It's for AI training" is the corporate term for "It's just a prank bro".
Real consequences for the other party but saying it magically relieves one of all responsibility (or at least that's the hope).
My best guess is that this is falling under KYC/AML (Know Your Customer & Anti-Money Laundering).
Which are areas k-ID doesn't cover at least not legally.
But yeah KYC/AML are pretty privacy intrusive by design.
Sadly all solutions will require either showing an ID, having a electronic machine readable document (eMRD; many passports support this) or doing a face scan.
However some of those would at least make the age proof unlikable to the actual ID.
Tbf. they work with debit/giro cards as well but they are tied to the same companies.
There are a few other options but they aren't as commonly implemented. ZK-proofs and selective disclosure for example.
But they require a broader infrastructure.
Also don't get me wrong. I don't like AV just because it's possible to do with reasonable privacy.
But it's at least better than what Persona has done. We can't trust purely on promises.
That said AV doesn't have to be as terrible as it is today.
There are some solutions that are at least reasonably anonymous using zero-knowledge proofs, like what the EU wants to implement.
My largest issue is it's current implementation lacks a guarantee for privacy and accessibility
Some do, other just care about "teen inappropriate" in general or give a maximum amount of "obscene" material that can be on the platform.
It strongly depends on where you live, even within the U.S. the laws vary widely.
I'm certain most people are not looking forward to go into actual hosting.
We can look for alternatives but they will all just delay the inevitable.
Even public Matrix servers may be subject to this, the benefit is self hosting although that doesn't really remove legal burden, it just moves it down to the server owner.
matrix.org/blog/2026/02...
My guess is that they are going to move back to k-ID.
They probably will never drop AV since the amount of laws requiring it - at least for "teen-inappropriate" - content is increasing.
This is not an isolated Discord issue it became a legal issue around the world.
While yeah that is mostly aimed at porn it could easily explain why Discord only requires it to turn off "teen inappropriate" filters.
Also the EU also is starting to enforce this probably very soon.
digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/c...
It's just unlikely to change substantially. They are mostly likely just switching AV providers.
There are more than enough laws by now that Discord is unlikely to change the decision of age checks to turn off "teen appropriate"-filters.
At least 25 U.S. state already do + France, UK, Australia ...
As in they want to use zero-knowledge proofs (although not done yet).
Afaik Yivi (from the netherlands) already does so and there are other solutions being worked on as well.
So I at least hope we can move to something that's not requiring giving up the full identity.
