There is no legitimate reason to impose age verification on users in jurisdictions that do not legally mandate it.
It is a risk to the privacy and safety of all users on the platform - it provides an easier way for pedophiles to identify underage users and provides more doxable information.
Discord has no business making this decision on behalf of jurisdictions that do not legally mandate it.
> it provides an easier way for pedophiles to identify underage users and provides more doxable information.
Do you have any basis for assuming that that users who are under 18 will have that information revealed to other users? That’s not what I read in this article.
I also think you’re being quite prescriptive about a private commercial service. You’re entitled to your opinion, of course, but companies enact restrictions to their products and services not required by law all the time.
If Discord wants to make their service require a mandatory declaration of allegiance to the Klingon empire, they’re allowed to do that.
It’s actually trivially easy to detect if someone isn’t verified adult: If you DM them something normal it’ll go through, but if you try to send them any image marked as spoiler it’ll show you an error, and they don’t see anything.
So yes, it’s super easy for groomers to focus on children with this update.
This is the type of issue I was referring to, yes.
It will be trivial for pedophiles to figure out which accounts aren't tagged as verified adults.
And knowing how these sorts of dynamics work - it'll largely be children in third world countries that will be the primary victims of pedophiles in this manner.
I'm not going to test this myself, but anyone can filter 'Mature Sexual Media' and 'Graphic Media' in their settings. You can configure Discord to block it. Wouldn't that same error occur if a user chooses to have that content blocked?
I totally agree. At the same time, nobody should be using Discord anyway, for a variety of reasons. They're one of the least trustworthy online platforms I can think of, and have unfortunately encouraged online ecosystems where you have to "Join our Discord" in order to maybe be heard. I would be delighted if age verification encourage more people to abandon Discord. In a better world, companies like that wouldn't be allowed to become zombie corporations but instead be forced to go out of business.
I have a few years old account. One day they just blocked be out and rudely demanded a phone number.
At the time I had TOTP based 2FA since forever.
Fine, I got myself a burner number (not sharing a real number with creeps and bullies), account tot unblocked. I kept using it.
A week later I deleted a phone number form my account (marked as optional after all), and the account got immediately, immediately blocked, after I saved the changes.
They'll shut down servers and close your account with no reason provided outside of demanding you add a phone number. It's happened to me a few times, and I was squeaky clean on there even when compared to the way I talk on HN. Didn't matter whether I provided a phone number. I'm not the only one it's happened to. Anyone with friends on Discord should make sure to write down their contact information in case Discord one day decides that they or their community doesn't exist anymore. But do they delete your data? No, of course they don't... they keep it all to themselves!
THIS. Nearly lost several large owned 'servers' on the account, too, due to the phone number demands! Support was awful, making needless month long hoops and ultimately not helping me at all.
Meanwhile Discourse (the open source forum software) has recently added voice and video calling. Matrix is a good option, also.
Not to mention it is a total silo that is not indexed by search engines and protected by archive.org - one day when Discords VC money finally runs out, it could all vanish in an instant, destroying communities and a lot of culture.
Well, there's a lot more low-hanging fruit there to be had.
It was sadly too trivial using various Discord search engines to find things like BDSM servers advertising to "14-28 year olds", or ones where minors openly sell NSFW content.
Discord as a whole is oftentimes enabling the communities to prey on those users, not just making the users more identifiable.
There’s secondary effects from not using their platform to consider as well. There’s several applications (open and closed source) I used recently that moved all their support (email/forums) to discord.
There are several jurisdictions that require companies to ensure that age limits are not bypassed via VPN or anonymizers. This puts the companies in a catch-22, block all VPN and anonymizers access, restricting many people with no recourse, or applying the age rules unilaterally, restricting some teens, but giving recourse to adults using VPNs.
It is not, as you say, "a risk to the privacy and safety of all users", but rather just those marked as needing to verify.
So why not apply the age verification check to known VPN services and leave residential IPs alone? Laws from one country can only apply to another country to only so much of a degree.
I did not limit my statement to "people providing their government ID are at risk" or some equivalent for a reason. Bootstrapping the service for accounts it flags as adult now completely leaves all future services who have no pre-existing userbase to behaviorally profile - facilitating an industry norm that age/ID verification should be expected going forward is, and I repeat, a risk to the safety and privacy of all users.
Don't strawman an argument next time as "uninformed" lest you reveal just how many false assumptions you were making in arriving at that conclusion.
Sadly, Italian officials know about tor and will do whatever they can to bypass geo restrictions. We got hit with a fine, this isn't speculation.
Texas has indicated that it will hold companies liable even if users bypass age verification via VPN or anonymizers.
This isn't the industry deciding that they really want age verification, this is the industry deciding that they don't want to face the potential litigation. Complain about the laws, not the companies following the laws.
Countries trying to impose their laws on other countries that affect residents of other countries seem like they're raising a question of territoriality.
Seems like that's a more appropriate venue for international discussions between governments to figure this out rather than a situation where each country is trying to pass laws that affect much of the rest of the world.
rockskon · · focus · HN ↗
There is no legitimate reason to impose age verification on users in jurisdictions that do not legally mandate it.
It is a risk to the privacy and safety of all users on the platform - it provides an easier way for pedophiles to identify underage users and provides more doxable information.
Discord has no business making this decision on behalf of jurisdictions that do not legally mandate it.
Grombobulous · · focus · HN ↗
Do you have any basis for assuming that that users who are under 18 will have that information revealed to other users? That’s not what I read in this article.
I also think you’re being quite prescriptive about a private commercial service. You’re entitled to your opinion, of course, but companies enact restrictions to their products and services not required by law all the time.
If Discord wants to make their service require a mandatory declaration of allegiance to the Klingon empire, they’re allowed to do that.
iAMkenough · · focus · HN ↗
hananova · · focus · HN ↗
So yes, it’s super easy for groomers to focus on children with this update.
rockskon · · focus · HN ↗
It will be trivial for pedophiles to figure out which accounts aren't tagged as verified adults.
And knowing how these sorts of dynamics work - it'll largely be children in third world countries that will be the primary victims of pedophiles in this manner.
thetallguyyy · · focus · HN ↗
gcr · · focus · HN ↗
efilife · · focus · HN ↗
mrheosuper · · focus · HN ↗
hananova · · focus · HN ↗
ravenstine · · focus · HN ↗
hax0ron3 · · focus · HN ↗
yndoendo · · focus · HN ↗
subscribed · · focus · HN ↗
At the time I had TOTP based 2FA since forever.
Fine, I got myself a burner number (not sharing a real number with creeps and bullies), account tot unblocked. I kept using it.
A week later I deleted a phone number form my account (marked as optional after all), and the account got immediately, immediately blocked, after I saved the changes.
F** Discord and its ilk.
ravenstine · · focus · HN ↗
Scaled · · focus · HN ↗
Meanwhile Discourse (the open source forum software) has recently added voice and video calling. Matrix is a good option, also.
m4rtink · · focus · HN ↗
FireBeyond · · focus · HN ↗
It was sadly too trivial using various Discord search engines to find things like BDSM servers advertising to "14-28 year olds", or ones where minors openly sell NSFW content.
Discord as a whole is oftentimes enabling the communities to prey on those users, not just making the users more identifiable.
senectus1 · · focus · HN ↗
I think i'm going to run down the dont use it path, which is a shame, because i do use it atm.
mysterydip · · focus · HN ↗
hatsix · · focus · HN ↗
It is not, as you say, "a risk to the privacy and safety of all users", but rather just those marked as needing to verify.
Your hyperbolic rant is uninformed and tiring.
rockskon · · focus · HN ↗
I did not limit my statement to "people providing their government ID are at risk" or some equivalent for a reason. Bootstrapping the service for accounts it flags as adult now completely leaves all future services who have no pre-existing userbase to behaviorally profile - facilitating an industry norm that age/ID verification should be expected going forward is, and I repeat, a risk to the safety and privacy of all users.
Don't strawman an argument next time as "uninformed" lest you reveal just how many false assumptions you were making in arriving at that conclusion.
hatsix · · focus · HN ↗
Texas has indicated that it will hold companies liable even if users bypass age verification via VPN or anonymizers.
This isn't the industry deciding that they really want age verification, this is the industry deciding that they don't want to face the potential litigation. Complain about the laws, not the companies following the laws.
rockskon · · focus · HN ↗
Seems like that's a more appropriate venue for international discussions between governments to figure this out rather than a situation where each country is trying to pass laws that affect much of the rest of the world.
seany · · focus · HN ↗