Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year • Hacker News Board

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#411

Post by dewey » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 9:56 PM UTC

_davide_ wrote: post #128

Seriously ready to fully drop google emails and services, i'm using vivaldi + personal email for a while now, the migration was slow a bit painful but complete. Only the phone is still attached to play store and google, but i'm 100% ready to switch to the fully supported Chinese variant of ColorOS and flush Google into the toilet once and for all. But my next phone will 100% be a Sailfish again.

Even if you drop Google you'll still have a bunch of websites that now also will require age verification.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#412

Post by skybrian » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 10:00 PM UTC

RandomGerm4n wrote: post #154

I'm fundamentally opposed to age verification because it usually leads to mandatory account creation no matter how privacy friendly the age verification process itself may be. It's already extremely annoying that, for example, on YouTube, you can no longer watch many videos without an account. Furthermore, the whole thing also reinforces monopolies. Once you've verified your age on one platform, the barrier to switch…

Attempting to prevent websites from learning about their audience is difficult. For example, Lego has a "play zone" and it has other pages geared towards adults. You get an immediate popup asking if you want to go to the play zone or not. If a user clicks on play zone, that's a good signal (but not guaranteed) that they're probably a child.

Preventing this would be difficult. If there are any behavioral differences between children and adults, that's a signal. And it would mean websites couldn't build experiences tailored to their audiences. Do we really want to try to suppress all behavioral cues that can be used to distinguish children from adults? Is it worth it?

A reasonable compromise is that websites and apps should be able to learn about devices, not people. It should be trivial to figure out whether a visit is from a child-locked device or not, no account needed. Much like clicking on "kids zone," it doesn't mean you know for sure who's really using the device. For example, it could be an parent who turned the child lock on to see what happens, because parents should know these things.

It's another bit that could be used distinguish users, but giving away zero bits of information isn't practical.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#413

Post by hnav » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 10:19 PM UTC

egorfine wrote: post #393

I hate it so much it makes my blood boil. The internet as we knew it comes to an end and we are... complicit? Judging from comments here it seems like some of HN readers do actually unironically take this at face value. Which is weird. Of all people, we should be ones to see what is this going towards.

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#414

Post by cyberax » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 10:30 PM UTC

> Providing a safe online experience and protecting users from harm is a top priority at Google Play.

No, it's not. Your top priority is squeezing as much money as possible.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#415

Post by codedokode » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 10:36 PM UTC

In my opinion, Google makes the UI too complicated and geeky which means parents are less likely to use it. Furthermore, they apply partial solution instead of complete architecture. In the article, the app must actively ask for age which means apps not asking the age, like Telegram still would allow access to inappropriate content.

There should be a single checkbox, "parent mode", which applies government-approved configuration, and the minority who bother, can manually edit it further. Many people are too lazy or not good with computers so the UI should be simple and not what is shown in the screenshots.

There is no need to ask the permission to get age information.

The parent mode should work on "white list" principle:

- only white-listed apps may be installed (list provided by government, parent may edit)

- in those apps ("age-aware apps"), only age-appropriate content is available. In a messenger, only parent- or school-approved contacts may be added.

- the browser refuses to open any web page not having a government-approved signature in HTTP headers (geek minority can add their signatures to the white list). Adult sites are not allowed to have such a signature.

- there should not be multiple age gradations, 3 is enough (adult, teenager, tiny child).

So all parents or store employee should do is to tick the checkbox and set a password or fingerprint for management.

It wouldn't solve the problem completely because there are many irresponsible parents.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#416

Post by codedokode » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 10:50 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #368

autoexec wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only acceptable solution would be for apps and websites to simply include a recommended age. Allowing parents to configure their children’s devices to block services that require users to be older than the specified age or that do not provide an age rating. That just entertains the false justification for what is ultimately about surveillance and control. There are privacy preserving alternatives to accounts an…

What might those be? Everything I've seen is ineffective or can be compromised. I think letting parents parent is probably the best option, but will require better/easier/free tools and education to help lock down different categories of harm.

1) When buying a device, store employee could program user's age range.

2) When configuring a device, parent may toggle "child mode" checkbox to switch the device into "child mode", protected with a password or fingerprint.

3) The tokens, containing a private key (same for all tokens) can be sold in liquor stores to adults only. This token could confirm the age without a passport.

It is interesting that is US (unless I am wrong) you can vote and change the government without a selfie and a passport, but you need them to use Reddit or Discord.

> but will require better/easier/free tools and education to help lock down different categories of harm.

There should be a single big "child mode" checkbox for normal people and "configure" button for 1% of geeks. Most people do not need tools and have no interest in configuring allowed categories.

> Everything I've seen is ineffective or can be compromised

Selfie/passport also can be compromised by asking a friend/older brother/parents to verify your account. Especially if you have a poor adult friend with alcoholic dependency in dire need of a new portion.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#417

Post by mikeocool » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 10:53 PM UTC

SirMaster wrote: post #403

mikeocool wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, seriously, New York just passed law that makes it illegal to show engagement-driven feeds to kids. I can’t wait to not age verify on instagram and permanently get back a feed that’s only people I follow.

You know you can also just not use Instagram...

I used to quite like instagram when it was a good way to keep up with a well curated group of friends who would share occasional interesting photos (though even then it could end up being performative).

But you’re right, these days I’ve largely stopped using after i realized every time I opened it, I was looking at a stream of drivel designed to keep me scrolling.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#418

Post by codedokode » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 11:00 PM UTC

autoexec wrote: post #374

giantg2 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What might those be? Everything I've seen is ineffective or can be compromised. I think letting parents parent is probably the best option, but will require better/easier/free tools and education to help lock down different categories of harm.

There's nothing that can't be worked around or compromised in some way. Even the face scans and ID scans being used today are being circumvented. In the end we do need parents to parent, but websites should help. The easiest way would be for websites to send an HTTP header to the client so that censorware can know to block or allow it accordingly.

The header must confirm that site is age-appropriate. No header should be interpreted as "adults only". This is the safest option, and it doesn't require 99% of webmasters to do anything which is in my opinion better than any other proposal.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#419

Post by giantg2 » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 11:01 PM UTC

codedokode wrote: post #416

giantg2 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What might those be? Everything I've seen is ineffective or can be compromised. I think letting parents parent is probably the best option, but will require better/easier/free tools and education to help lock down different categories of harm.

1) When buying a device, store employee could program user's age range. 2) When configuring a device, parent may toggle "child mode" checkbox to switch the device into "child mode", protected with a password or fingerprint. 3) The tokens, containing a private key (same for all tokens) can be sold in liquor stores to adults only. This token could confirm the age without a passport. It is interesting that is US (unless…

Number 2 is basically here for many things, but not as easy as a single checkbox. Number 3 is something I've thought about, but it seems that's never seriously discussed in politics.

Re: Google will expand age checks on Android worldwide till the end of the year

#420

Post by codedokode » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 11:13 PM UTC

iamnothere wrote: post #239

account42 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And instead of an age you could even make the indication about what is potentially objectionable so that parents can choose when to allow their kids to see what - and adults can also choose to avoid certain things.

Exactly, without this you’re handing the power to decide what is “appropriate” to someone else.

No, you are handling the boring work to someone else. Most non-geek people, I assume, are not interesting in manually configuring the website white lists, so there should be a single "child mode" checkbox for 99% of population and "configure" for the rest of us.