[HN Gopher] Update on age requirements for apps distributed in T...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Update on age requirements for apps distributed in Texas
        
       Author : Austin_Conlon
       Score  : 22 points
       Date   : 2026-01-12 20:27 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (developer.apple.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (developer.apple.com)
        
       | expedition32 wrote:
       | It is interesting to me that we are running a giant social
       | experiment with people's childhoods- something we know can only
       | be done once.
       | 
       | Meanwhile the silicon valley elite admitted that they don't let
       | their 12 year old daughter on Instagram...
        
         | munificent wrote:
         | Society has always been running giant social experiments on the
         | next generation. That's what a culture is.
        
           | bmitc wrote:
           | What are some key examples prior the Internet?
        
         | conductr wrote:
         | It's more interesting to me why nobody except sv elites can
         | come to the same conclusion themselves regarding <12 year olds
         | on instagram and instead seem to need the government to parent
         | their kids
         | 
         | I hate this law and those like it, mostly because it shouldn't
         | be necessary for government to overstep like this. But when I
         | look around... maybe it is
        
           | wmf wrote:
           | It's a collective action problem.
        
             | godelski wrote:
             | I don't think it is just that. Look at an HN thread on
             | privacy and you will find a lot of people that do not see
             | any issues.
             | 
             | The problem really comes down to complexity and trust. The
             | truth is that there never is a problem if we operate under
             | the assumption that all actors are honest and good natured.
             | But the reality of the world is that this is a naive
             | assumption. All citizens should be concerned about changing
             | objectives from their authorities. A democracy can vote in
             | dictators and a benevolent dictator can quickly change to a
             | malicious one (which has happened frequently historically).
             | We also need to be concerned with non-authority threat
             | actors, from criminals to nation-state actors competing
             | states (and even allies for the same aforementioned
             | reason).
             | 
             | That's the problem. The realistic conditions we need to
             | solve for are far more complex than the ones people operate
             | under and we have a difficult time talking to one another
             | about it. For a privacy conscious person it does not matter
             | if the holder of the data is the most benevolent entity
             | that could exist, it is if there is the opportunity for the
             | data to be held by anyone else. Thus, no one should hold
             | it. No matter how "worthy".
             | 
             | Even on HN there are a large number of users who think they
             | are not the target of hackers, and especially nation-state
             | hackers. Of all places on the internet this should be one
             | of the most informed on the matter and best suited to
             | understand that being "normal" is what makes them a target,
             | to be incorporated into bot-nets or other reasons like
             | being used for lateral movement. It is the exact same
             | problem: the reality is far more complex. The assumption of
             | not being a target is based on the understanding that they
             | are not the end target but the complexity of reality is
             | that this is not the condition for being /a/ target.
             | 
             | I do agree that collective action matters. But it is hard
             | to form collective action when people do not have the
             | motivation for action. And they don't have the motivation
             | because they have a naive approximation of the problems at
             | hand.
        
         | MiddleEndian wrote:
         | I would not let my (hypothetical) 12 year old on Instagram. I
         | also don't want to give Instagram (or any other site, since I
         | don't use Instagram) my ID to view content on it.
        
       | Edmond wrote:
       | If the hammer ever comes down on this issue, ie hardcore
       | requirement for age verification, there are ways to do this while
       | protecting privacy.
       | 
       | We are experimenting with bootstraping a PKI certificate trust
       | chain for facilitating trust projection and information
       | verification online. Think of it as the ability to do things like
       | age verification at scale via a peer-2-peer ish mechanism instead
       | of sending your government id to a service provider.
       | 
       | One experiment is with PGP key holders (for now Keybase key
       | holders) as CAs:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46576590
       | 
       | And also .gov email holders:
       | 
       | https://blog.certisfy.com/2025/12/using-gov-email-addresses-...
       | 
       | It's all self-service and requires no sign-up or download of
       | anything, the app (https://certisfy.com/app) is an in-browser app
       | and all the cryptography happens in the browser.
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | Why so complex. ID cards could solve that issue, every European
         | ID card has a powerful and programmable crypto processor /
         | secure element inside and so do all ICAO compliant passports.
         | 
         | Have the website emit a random nonce (to guide against replay
         | attacks / reuse) plus an information what is requested (name,
         | DOB, address, some like the Croatian ID card even store
         | photographs), the card prepares a response with that data,
         | signs that using its private key (with a 2FA being possible as
         | well by using a PIN/password) and returns it to the website.
         | 
         | The Croatian ID card doesn't even need a middleware because it
         | doesn't do 2FA, you can ask it all of that by pure NFC
         | communication. The German ID card requires a middleware
         | ("AusweisApp", open source) for added protection though.
        
           | Edmond wrote:
           | Age verification could indeed be implemented in other ways.
           | The approach outlined above is for information verification
           | and trust projection in general, meaning you can put just
           | about any verified information on a certificate and it can be
           | used online.
           | 
           | Here is a concrete example of how trustworthy certificates
           | can be used online, this is my personal profile on bluesky
           | with verification that is independent of the Blue sky
           | service: https://bsky.app/profile/bitlooter.bsky.social
           | 
           | If you click on the profile image you can enter that code
           | into https://certisfy.com/app to verify the identity of the
           | profile. That sticker could be on any online profile to prove
           | high quality authenticity, it could for instance be on an
           | e-commerce site to prove that the site isn't a scam.
        
           | LukeShu wrote:
           | In 2005, we decided that we were going to have Real ID by
           | 2008. We're now looking at a 2027 completion date.
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | Google and Apple already have private age verification so I
         | think the time for experiments is past.
        
         | vorpalhex wrote:
         | Can age assurance be done privately and anonymously?
         | Absolutely.
         | 
         | But the entire point of age laws is to stifle free speech and
         | ruin privacy. Thus why every age law requires uploading an ID.
         | 
         | If it was just age, just require a credit charge of a $1
         | through an intermediary. Good for a year or whatever.
        
           | Nextgrid wrote:
           | > the entire point of age laws is to stifle free speech and
           | ruin privacy
           | 
           | Does it? I mean sure, it's a side-effect that some (most?)
           | politicians might find desirable, but there's also people who
           | just want to restrict access to adult material (not taking a
           | position on whether it's a good or bad thing here). Most
           | parents would probably agree with the latter even if they
           | don't with the former.
        
             | vorpalhex wrote:
             | Is there anyone who can't do this today? Adult websites
             | self label, and both your router and ISP offer removing
             | adult websites as an option.
             | 
             | If your kid is going to get around that by clever vpn use,
             | age gates don't help.
        
               | Nextgrid wrote:
               | > If your kid is going to get around that by clever vpn
               | use, age gates don't help.
               | 
               | I think politicians and their supporters _believe_ they
               | do help. Of course from their perspective the only way to
               | know for sure is to implement the restrictions
               | (regardless of whether they succeed, at least they
               | fulfill their campaign promises to their electors of
               | "doing something").
        
             | drakythe wrote:
             | While some people may want that, everyone who has the
             | technical know-how to restrict access can name probably a
             | dozen different ways to do it without violating privacy via
             | ID Upload. The only reason to push for ID Upload instead of
             | the other methods is because policy makers are lazy and
             | information resellers want as much information about us all
             | as they can get. Its lazy because it just recreates the
             | liquor store "Can I see your ID please?" experience
             | everyone is so familiar with and takes no explanation, so
             | lazy policy makers find it easy to push for, without
             | accounting for how that data is handled after use.
             | Meanwhile information clearing houses and anti-privacy
             | wanks are salivating at how this can be leveraged so they
             | too push the "ID Upload is the only way!" messaging.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | >and information resellers want as much information about
               | us all as they can get.
               | 
               | That seems implausible given that most sites requiring
               | age verification outsource it to some third party, which
               | means they're not getting all the juicy biometrics.
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | My concern with this is how far it goes and whether it has
         | unintended side-effects.
         | 
         | There are a lot of situations in history where in retrospect
         | being able to evade government oversight and restrictions
         | turned out to be a good thing. During the Holocaust a number of
         | Jews and other targeted populations were able to escape hostile
         | territory because they were able to get forged passports and
         | other documents, something that strong cryptography would make
         | impossible (even in a perfectly privacy-preserving way).
         | 
         | I'm not sure how old you are or when you started in tech, but
         | in my case I started as a kid and was able to build the skills
         | that now gave me my career thanks to unrestricted Internet
         | access (and sure, I saw pornography a few years earlier than I
         | should have - didn't seem to have any measurable detrimental
         | effect on me, especially not compared to the cigarettes and
         | alcohol).
         | 
         | This wouldn't have been possible if age verification was
         | properly implemented, since a lot of the resources that might
         | be useful for someone to learn programming/sysadmin could also
         | be used to circumvent age verification and thus would've been
         | blocked, and I would probably be working a minimum wage job
         | and/or engaging in crime to sustain myself as a result. If I
         | had to choose whatever harmful effects from pornography versus
         | having a min-wage job, I'll take the porn side-effects any day,
         | at least I have a roof over my head.
        
         | rockskon wrote:
         | I find claims of any technology being able to simultaneously
         | validate your age while "respecting privacy" to be suspect at
         | best. Even if the technology could work in theory, it would be
         | built on top of an ecosystem designed around an ecosystem hell-
         | bent on monetizing info about you.
        
           | jazzyjackson wrote:
           | Zero knowledge proofs can perform expressions that check
           | values within a JSON tree without exposing any of those
           | values to the requesting party, for instance "year of birth <
           | 2005" can return true or false without returning the person's
           | numeric birth year. Essentially the requesting party has the
           | holder of the credential perform a computation, the result is
           | guaranteed to be the result of each and every instruction
           | over a target data structure (only knowing the hash and
           | signature chain of the credential, so for instance your
           | government issued id can be signed by your secretary of
           | states public key)
           | 
           | Estonia has a really interesting government issued public key
           | infrastructure where users can validate their identity with
           | their physical ID card and a USB reader (maybe it's NFC by
           | now?) but I don't think I've heard of the above scheme used
           | in practice, just sat through a presentation at the internet
           | identity workshop.
        
       | John23832 wrote:
       | Just let the parents be responsible. Jesus.
       | 
       | Attach minor accounts to the account of the parent, make the
       | parent say yes.
        
       | ghaff wrote:
       | Meanwhile I actually started college at 16 which is illegal in
       | some locales.
        
         | Jtsummers wrote:
         | > illegal in some locales.
         | 
         | In the US or elsewhere? I've known a lot of people who attended
         | college at 16, and through friends with teenage children know
         | even more these days. They attended (or are attending) schools
         | in a variety of states.
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | I think "illegal" is a strong word. Some states don't allow
           | it in public universities. I suspect they're fine with it at
           | private universities.
        
             | Jtsummers wrote:
             | > Some states don't allow it in public universities.
             | 
             | But which states? I haven't been able to find anything
             | about states barring minors from attending universities.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-01-12 23:00 UTC)