Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

2026-03-1310:151013437github.com

Contribute to upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings development by creating an account on GitHub.

NameName

An open-source intelligence investigation into how Meta Platforms built a multi-channel influence operation to pass age verification laws that shift regulatory burden from social media platforms onto Apple and Google's app stores.

Every finding in this repository is sourced from public records: IRS 990 filings, Senate LD-2 lobbying disclosures, state lobbying registrations, campaign finance databases, corporate registries, WHOIS/DNS records, Wayback Machine archives, and investigative journalism.

Status: Active investigation. 47 proven findings, 9 structurally possible but unproven hypotheses, and multiple pending FOIA responses.

Research period: 2026-03-11 to present

Meta spent a record $26.3 million on federal lobbying in 2025, deployed 86+ lobbyists across 45 states, and covertly funded a "grassroots" child safety group called the Digital Childhood Alliance (DCA) to advocate for the App Store Accountability Act (ASAA). The ASAA requires app stores to verify user ages before downloads but imposes no requirements on social media platforms. If it becomes law, Apple and Google absorb the compliance cost while Meta's apps face zero new mandates.

This investigation traced funding flows across five confirmed channels, analyzed $2.0 billion in dark money grants, searched 59,736 DAF recipients, parsed LD-2 filings, and mapped campaign contributions across four states to document the operation.

Meta lobbying spend chart showing record $26.3M in 2025

Meta's federal lobbying spending jumped from $19M (2022-2023) to $24M (2024) to $26.3M (2025) as ASAA bills were introduced in roughly 20 states. In Louisiana alone, 12 lobbyists were deployed for a single bill that passed 99-0.

Chart showing zero child safety grants across $2.0B in Arabella network grants

Across all five Arabella Advisors entities (New Venture Fund, Sixteen Thirty Fund, North Fund, Windward Fund, Hopewell Fund), 4,433 grants totaling approximately $2.0 billion were analyzed. Not a single dollar went to any child safety, age verification, or tech policy organization. The Schedule I grant pathway through the Arabella network is definitively ruled out.

Network diagram mapping Meta's five influence channels

Five confirmed channels connect Meta's spending to ASAA advocacy: direct federal lobbying ($26.3M), state lobbyist networks (45 states), the Digital Childhood Alliance (astroturf 501(c)(4)), super PACs ($70M+), and state legislative campaigns (3 laws passed). A sixth channel through the Arabella dark money network is structurally possible but unproven.

These standalone HTML documents provide detailed views of the investigation:

  • Full Investigation Documentation contains the complete OSINT investigation report with all five channels, evidence tables, and source citations.

  • Funding Network Timeline maps the chronological development of Meta's lobbying infrastructure, DCA's formation, and ASAA legislative progress across states.

  • Research Timeline tracks the investigation itself, showing when each finding was established and how threads connected.

(These are self-contained HTML files. Clone the repo and open them in a browser, or use Forgejo's raw file view.)

metafindings/
  data/
    processed/          24 research findings documents
    raw/osint_990/      Raw IRS 990 data extracts
  output/
    reports/            Summary reports, charts, and HTML documentation
    timeline/           Interactive timeline visualizations
    briefs/             Policy briefs and public comments
  OSINT_TASKLIST.md     Investigation task tracker with completion status

Meta retained 40+ lobbying firms and 87 federal lobbyists in 2025 (85% with prior government service). Meta's own LD-2 filings with the Senate explicitly list H.R. 3149/S. 1586, the App Store Accountability Act, as a lobbied bill. The filing narrative includes "protecting children, bullying prevention and online safety; youth safety and federal parental approval; youth restrictions on social media."

At the state level, confirmed operations include $338,500 to Headwaters Strategies (Colorado), $324,992+ across 9 firms and 12 lobbyists in Louisiana, and $1,036,728 in direct California lobbying (Q1-Q3 2025 alone). A Meta lobbyist brought the legislative language for Louisiana HB-570 directly to the bill's sponsor, Rep. Kim Carver, who confirmed this publicly.

DCA is a 501(c)(4) advocacy group that Meta covertly funds. Bloomberg exposed the funding relationship in July 2025. Under oath at a Louisiana Senate committee hearing, Executive Director Casey Stefanski admitted receiving tech company funding but refused to name donors.

DCA has no EIN in the IRS Business Master File, no incorporation record in any state registry searched (CO, DC, DE, VA, OpenCorporates), and no Form 990 on file. It processes donations through the For Good DAF (formerly Network for Good) as a "Project," not a standalone nonprofit. Its likely fiscal sponsor is NCOSEAction/Institute for Public Policy (EIN 88-1180705), NCOSE's confirmed 501(c)(4) affiliate with the same leadership.

DCA's domain was registered December 18, 2024. The website was live and fully formed the next day. Every blog post and testimony targets Apple and Google. Meta is never mentioned or criticized.

Meta committed over $70 million to four state-level super PACs: ATEP ($45M, bipartisan, co-led by Hilltop Public Solutions), META California ($20M), California Leads ($5M), and Forge the Future (Texas, Republican-aligned). Forge the Future's stated policy priority is "empowering parents with oversight of children's online activities," which mirrors ASAA language exactly.

Hilltop Public Solutions co-leads the $45M ATEP super PAC and is also involved in DCA's messaging coordination, making it the first firm confirmed in both Meta's PAC operation and the astroturf advocacy track.

All super PACs are registered at the state level rather than with the FEC, scattering disclosure filings across individual state ethics commissions instead of a single searchable federal database.

Meta's Colorado lobbyist Adam Eichberg simultaneously serves as Board Chair of the New Venture Fund, the flagship 501(c)(3) of the Arabella Advisors network. NVF transfers $121.3 million annually to the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a 501(c)(4) with no donor disclosure requirements.

The Arabella network operates four entities from 1828 L Street NW, Washington DC (suites 300-A through 300-D) with combined annual revenue exceeding $1.3 billion. All five entities' grant recipients were analyzed (4,433 grants, approximately $2.0 billion). Zero dollars went to any child safety organization, definitively ruling out the Schedule I grant pathway.

If Meta money flows through the Arabella network to DCA, it would have to travel via fiscal sponsorship, consulting fees, or lobbying expenditures, which are more opaque than grant disclosures.

ASAA has been signed into law in three states:

  • Utah SB-142 (signed March 26, 2025, first in nation)
  • Texas SB 2420 (signed May 2025, paused by federal judge December 2025)
  • Louisiana HB-570 (signed June 30, 2025, effective July 1, 2026)

Roughly 17 additional states have introduced or are considering ASAA bills, including Kansas, South Carolina, Ohio, Georgia, and Florida. The federal version was introduced in May 2025 by Rep. John James (R-MI) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT).

Each finding below is documented with sources in the corresponding analysis file.

  1. Meta funds DCA, confirmed by Bloomberg reporters and partially admitted by Stefanski under oath at the Louisiana Senate Commerce Committee hearing (April 2025). Sources: Insurance Journal/Bloomberg July 2025, Deseret News Dec 2025, The Center Square LA.
  2. Meta deployed 86+ lobbyists across 45 states for ASAA and related campaigns. Source: OpenSecrets, state lobbying registrations.
  3. Meta spent $26.3 million on federal lobbying in 2025, an all-time record exceeding Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Source: OpenSecrets, Quiver Quantitative, Dome Politics.
  4. Meta paid Headwaters Strategies $338,500 for Colorado lobbying between 2019 and 2026. Source: Colorado SOS SODA API.
  5. Adam Eichberg simultaneously co-founded Meta's Colorado lobbying firm (Headwaters Strategies) and chairs the New Venture Fund board. Sources: Headwaters Strategies website, NVF board page, InfluenceWatch.
  6. NVF transfers $121.3 million to the Sixteen Thirty Fund (c)(4) annually. Source: NVF Form 990 Schedule I, 2022-2024.
  7. NVF does not directly fund any child safety or tech policy organizations via Schedule I grants. Source: NVF Form 990 Schedule I analysis, 2,669 recipients.
  8. DCA and DCI share infrastructure: same registrar (GoDaddy), CDN (Cloudflare), email (Microsoft 365), and marketing platform (Elastic Email). Source: DNS/WHOIS analysis.
  9. Pelican State Partners represents Meta as a lobbying client in Louisiana. Source: F Minus database, LA Board of Ethics.
  10. DCA leadership comes from NCOSE: three of four senior staff have NCOSE connections (Stefanski, Hawkins, McKay). Source: DCA website, NCOSE public records.
  11. DCA's John Read spent 30 years at DOJ Antitrust investigating app stores and Big Tech. Source: DOJ case filings, DCA team page.
  12. ASAA has been signed into law in three states: Utah (SB-142, March 2025), Louisiana (HB-570, June 2025), and Texas (SB 2420, May 2025, paused by judge December 2025). Sources: State legislature records, news coverage.
  13. The Sixteen Thirty Fund does not fund any child safety or tech policy organizations via Schedule I grants (306 of 318 recipients analyzed). Source: STF Form 990 Schedule I, 2024.
  14. All five Arabella entities analyzed: 4,433 grants (approximately $2.0 billion) with zero dollars going to child safety or tech policy organizations. Schedule I pathway definitively ruled out across the entire network. Sources: NVF, STF, North Fund, Windward, Hopewell Form 990 Schedule I filings via ProPublica.
  15. A Meta employee (Jake Levine, Product Manager) contributed $1,175 to ASAA sponsor Matt Ball's campaign apparatus on June 2, 2025. Source: Colorado TRACER bulk data.
  16. A Google Policy Manager (Kyle Gardner) also contributed $450 to Matt Ball. Multiple tech company employees from ASAA-affected companies targeted the same ASAA bill sponsor. Source: Colorado TRACER bulk data.
  17. Eichberg and Coyne (Headwaters principals) did not contribute to ASAA bill sponsors Ball or Paschal despite $20,000+ combined political giving. Source: Colorado TRACER bulk data.
  18. No direct Meta PAC contributions to any ASAA sponsor across Utah, Louisiana, Texas, or Colorado. Source: FollowTheMoney.org multi-state search.
  19. Todd Weiler (Utah SB-142 sponsor) does not accept corporate contributions and has not discussed ASAA directly with Meta. DCA served as the policy intermediary. Source: Investigative reporting, Weiler's public statements.
  20. DCA has no EIN in the IRS Business Master File. Not found in any of four regional extracts (eo1-eo4.csv) covering all US tax-exempt organizations. Source: IRS BMF regional extracts.
  21. DCI confirmed in IRS BMF with EIN 39-3684798, Delaware incorporation at 213 N Market St Wilmington, IRS ruling November 2025. Source: IRS BMF extract.
  22. Meta's Forge the Future super PAC spent $1.3 million in Texas ahead of March 2026 primaries. Source: Texas Ethics Commission filings, news coverage.
  23. DCA's website deployed less than 24 hours after domain registration: fully functional advocacy site with professional design, statistics, and Heritage/NCOSE testimonials. Source: Wayback Machine CDX API, 100+ snapshots.
  24. 77-day pipeline from DCA domain registration (December 18, 2024) to Utah SB-142 signing (March 5, 2025). Site pre-loaded with ASAA talking points before any bill had passed. Source: WHOIS records, Utah Legislature.
  25. Meta deployed 12 lobbyists for Louisiana HB-570, which passed 99-0. Disproportionate deployment indicates text-control and amendment-blocking rather than vote persuasion. Source: Investigative reporting, LA Board of Ethics.
  26. Three California tech policy employees from Meta, Google, and Pinterest contributed to Matt Ball within 90 days. All from ASAA-affected companies, all out-of-state, targeting a newly-appointed senator. Source: Colorado TRACER bulk data.
  27. Pelican State Partners represents both Meta and Roblox in Louisiana. Both are ASAA beneficiaries, enabling "broad industry support" framing. Source: F Minus database.
  28. DCA's coalition count inflated from 50+ to 140+ with only six organizations ever publicly named. No member list has been published on the website. Source: DCA website, Wayback Machine.
  29. NCOSE has a confirmed 501(c)(4) affiliate: NCOSEAction / Institute for Public Policy (EIN 88-1180705), IRS ruling May 2025, same address and leadership as NCOSE. Source: IRS BMF, NCOSE website.
  30. Network for Good is a Donor Advised Fund, not a payment processor. DCA is classified as "Project" (ID 258136) in the system. For Good explicitly limits grants to 501(c)(3) organizations. Source: For Good website, IRS determination.
  31. A Meta lobbyist drafted HB-570's legislative language, confirmed by sponsor Rep. Kim Carver. The bill as originally written placed age verification burden exclusively on app stores, not platforms. Source: Investigative reporting, Carver's public confirmation.
  32. Sen. Jay Morris's amendment expanded HB-570 to include app developers alongside app stores, leading to a conference committee compromise. Source: LA Legislature records.
  33. Nicole Lopez (Meta Director of Global Litigation Strategy for Youth) testified in both Louisiana and South Dakota for ASAA bills, serving as Meta's national ASAA spokesperson. Source: Legislative hearing records.
  34. The Sixteen Thirty Fund's $31 million lobbying budget and $13.1 million in professional fees contain zero mentions of child safety, digital policy, age verification, or app stores. Source: STF Form 990 Part IX.
  35. John R. Read (DCA Senior Policy Advisor) lists "Digital Childhood Alliance" as his employer in Colorado TRACER records. Contributed $100 to AG candidate Hetal Doshi (October 2025). Source: Colorado TRACER.
  36. Matt Ball received 8% of total fundraising from tech industry employees. He is the only 2026 Colorado senate candidate with contributions from Meta, Pinterest, Instacart, Anthropic, and Google employees. Four of eight dual-maxed donors are tech employees. Source: Colorado TRACER analysis.
  37. NCOSE Schedule R reveals a two-entity evolution: the original NCOSE Action (EIN 86-2458921, c4 reclassified to c3) was replaced by the Institute for Public Policy (EIN 88-1180705, c4). All 19 NCOSE-to-Institute transaction indicators are marked "No" despite shared leadership. Source: NCOSE Form 990 Schedule R, 2019-2023.
  38. For Good DAF pathway definitively ruled out: 59,736 grant recipients across five years (approximately $1.73 billion) searched with zero matches for DCA, DCI, NCOSE, NCOSEAction, or any related entity. Source: For Good DAF grant data.
  39. NCOSE lobbying spending tripled from $78,000 to $204,000 concurrent with DCA launch and the ASAA legislative push (FY2023 to FY2024). Source: NCOSE Form 990 Part IX.
  40. Forge the Future super PAC explicitly lists an ASAA-aligned policy priority: "Empowering parents with oversight of children's online activities across devices and digital environments." Source: Forge the Future filings.
  41. Hilltop Public Solutions bridges Meta's super PAC and DCA operations. It co-leads ATEP ($45M) and is involved in DCA messaging coordination. First firm confirmed in both tracks. Source: ATEP filings, investigative reporting.
  42. Meta super PACs are state-level entities (not FEC-registered), deliberately scattering filings across state ethics commissions to avoid centralized searchability. Source: FEC search (negative), state PAC registrations.
  43. Meta's total documented political spending exceeds $70 million: $45M ATEP, $20M META California, $5M California Leads, with downstream flows to Forge the Future (TX) and Making Our Tomorrow (IL). Source: State PAC filings, news coverage.
  44. Casey Stefanski never appears on any NCOSE 990 filing despite reportedly working there ten years. Not among officers, directors, key employees, or five highest-compensated. Source: NCOSE Form 990 filings, 2015-2023.
  45. Meta's LD-2 filings explicitly list the App Store Accountability Act (H.R. 3149/S. 1586) as a lobbied bill. This is the first direct evidence from Meta's own federal filings connecting its $26.3M lobbying spend to the specific legislation DCA advocates for. Source: Senate LDA filing UUID b73445ed-15e5-42e7-a1e8-aeb224755267.
  46. Meta simultaneously lobbies FOR ASAA and ON KOSA/COPPA 2.0, supporting legislation that burdens Apple and Google while opposing or amending legislation that would regulate Meta directly. Both appear in the same LD-2 filing. Source: Meta LD-2 Q1-Q2 2025.
  47. LD-2 narrative mirrors DCA messaging: "youth safety and federal parental approval" framing in Meta's federal filings matches DCA's "parental approval" and "child protection" advocacy language. Source: LD-2 filing CPI issue code narrative.
  1. Meta funds flow through the Arabella network via non-grant mechanisms (fiscal sponsorship, consulting fees, lobbying expenditures). The Schedule I and For Good DAF pathways are both ruled out.
  2. DCA operates under NCOSEAction (EIN 88-1180705) as fiscal sponsor. The personnel chain is direct (van der Watt to Hawkins to Stefanski), but NCOSE reports zero transactions with its c4 affiliate.
  3. NVF's $36.7 million in lobbying expenditures support age verification advocacy.
  4. Jake Levine's contribution to Matt Ball was coordinated by Meta's government affairs team rather than being purely personal.
  5. STF's $31M lobbying fees and $13.1M professional fees include age verification advocacy, but aggregate reporting prevents confirmation.
  6. Angela Paxton (Texas ASAA sponsor) was among the unnamed state senators supported by Forge the Future.
  7. NCOSE's lobbying spend tripling is causally related to DCA/ASAA activity (timing is concurrent but program descriptions do not mention ASAA).
  8. DCA's For Good donation page is cosmetic. Actual funding comes directly from Meta, not small-dollar DAF donations.

This investigation used Claude Code (Anthropic's CLI tool, running Claude Opus) was used as a research assistant for:

  • Bulk data processing: parsing 4,433 IRS Schedule I grant records, 59,736 DAF recipients, 132MB of Colorado TRACER campaign finance data, and IRS Business Master File extracts covering all US tax-exempt organizations
  • Cross-referencing findings across 24 analysis files and identifying patterns that span multiple research threads
  • Drafting intermediate working documents and structured data summaries
  • Web searches against public databases (OpenSecrets, ProPublica, state lobbying portals, WHOIS/DNS, Wayback Machine)

Claude Code did not independently choose what to investigate, decide what constitutes a finding, or determine what to publish. Every factual claim in this repository cites a primary source (IRS filing, Senate disclosure, state database, legislative record, or published reporting) that can be independently verified. The tool does not change whether Meta's LD-2 filing lists H.R. 3149, whether DCA has an EIN, or whether Stefanski admitted tech funding under oath. The records exist or they don't.

If you want to verify any finding, the source URLs and database identifiers are provided throughout. Start with the primary records, not with this repository.

This is an OSINT research product. All findings are based on public records. Source data is cited throughout.

You can’t perform that action at this time.


Read the original article

Comments

  • By inetknght 2026-03-1314:207 reply

    Age verification is merely the background task to set up infrastructure for OS to provide many many other signals about who's using the device.

    Age signals from the OS? Need to provide a channel of information available to applications. Applications already talk to servers with unchecked commonality.

    Biometric data? Today it unlocks your private key. Tomorrow it's used to verify you are the same person that was used during sign-up -- the same that was "age-verified".

    Next year, the application needs to "double-check" your identity. That missile that's coming to you? Definitely not AI-controlled, definitely not coming to destroy the "verified" person who posted a threatening comment about the AI system's god complex. Nope, it's coming to deliver freedom verification.

    • By prox 2026-03-1318:04

      “This isn’t freedom, this is fear”

      Cpt America in the Winter Soldier

    • By Muromec 2026-03-1315:1810 reply

      Nobody stops the government from sending goons to your door right now for a snarky comment. Some govts in fact do it today. It is also cheaper than ai rocket and more precise too

      • By Arubis 2026-03-1315:255 reply

        Goons don't scale well. Wide-scale intimidation does.

        • By gzread 2026-03-1316:18

          In a sense, surveillance is a multiplier on your goons, creating virtual goons. If you have 5 goons but you can send them directly to the house of people who disagree with the government with 99% accuracy, it's like you had 500 goons waiting outside 500 houses then only entering the ones where people disagree with the government.

        • By rembal 2026-03-1316:33

          Goons work MUCH better than rockets for intimidation, and actually scale much better.

          Rocket is obvious and spectacular. Those are for amateurs.

          A journalist got beaten up to the brink of death and will never walk again by 'unknown perpetrators'? Well, it's a dangerous country, and he had it coming, maybe some concerned citizens went a bit too far, but our dear leader cannot watch over everybody.

          Scaling: do you think other journalists will not take notice?

          And he will still be alive to reminder them how they may end up.

          If you want to see how far imagination can go here, look up Artyom Kamardin and think how would you behave after hearing his story .

        • By ghywertelling 2026-03-1317:23

          Goons are bad publicity. Doing your dirty stuff as hidden from view as possible is best option

        • By mystraline 2026-03-1315:391 reply

          Its called police. And they scale extraordinarily well.

          And turns out power-tripping men offered raw power over other humans on threat of violence is something they like.

          And ICE? Remember J6 and Three Percenter's and all those right wing militias? They ended up in ICE. Same reasons.

          • By brewcejener 2026-03-1315:463 reply

            A very bold claim I have heard repeatedly, backed up with zero evidence. Care to share any proof you have found?

            • By pstuart 2026-03-1316:04

              https://archive.is/nwxkh

              That was from a quick search, no doubt there's more. Now it gets down to trust issues on reporting.

            • By nurettin 2026-03-1315:56

              It is called swatting.

            • By pessimizer 2026-03-1316:511 reply

              It's very important to pretend that ICE goons are significantly different from regular cops, because Democrats are going to wave a magic wand and declare ICE to be regular cops again when they are in control of them again.

              Meanwhile, regular cops have been doing the same awful things that they've always been doing, literally at the command of Democratic mayors who are pompously declaring that they won't enforce immigration law in speeches. They'll send cops to throw your shit into the street when your rent suddenly doubles, and won't report an illegal immigrant felon (whose history we know nothing about) to ICE.

              Organized white supremacists are nobodies with no power, they're all over the military, the cops, prison guards, and ICE. Meanwhile, Parchman Farm in Mississippi doesn't even report the people who are dying there, and has plastic all over the floors because the roofs are open to the elements. That's just legal American black people who this country actually owes something to, though. That was trendy like five years ago, it's so over now.

              • By ToucanLoucan 2026-03-1317:251 reply

                If you set aside social justice issues, the Democrats and Republicans basically agree. Republicans want a theocratic authoritarian state that can micromanage the workers and keep the economy going. Democrats want the same thing but with freedom of religion and more female CEOs of color.

                Now you obviously shouldn't set social justice aside, and given the choice, I absolutely prefer the capitalist hellscape where my friends and I are not being rounded up and killed, but that's a REMARKABLY low standard I've had to settle on as a voter.

                • By KerrAvon 2026-03-1317:52

                  GOPs and Democrats are the same on environmental, science, and public health policy completely, huh? You sure you wanna both sides it that hard?

      • By rdn 2026-03-1316:41

        The OP's point can be understood as an automization and mechanization of such targeting. Which will be necessary if the scope of thoughtcrime prosecution is to expand

      • By nesky 2026-03-1315:233 reply

        Cost kind of stops the government from sending goons right now, sure some governments do it but, it's costly at scale.

        • By justsid 2026-03-1315:304 reply

          Missiles are a lot more expensive and much less reusable than goons though. If the nation state can’t afford the goons, it can’t afford to missile you either

          • By c22 2026-03-1315:401 reply

            With the digital panopticon neither goons nor missles are really necessary. Opressive forces can just disable your spending and travel credits. If they need you dead or in custody they can just grab you the next time you pop up on camera near one of their agents.

          • By collingreen 2026-03-1315:37

            Drones aren't though. Plenty of ways to use the data above for evil deeds.

          • By brewcejener 2026-03-1315:48

            Reaper drones will be the more cost effective way to eradicate amalek.

          • By motbus3 2026-03-1316:22

            There are cheap drones with guns now thought

        • By jpadkins 2026-03-1315:372 reply

          The UK gov has shown to be incredibly efficient at arresting and imprisoning citizens for social media comments.

        • By vikingerik 2026-03-1316:03

          The cost effectiveness is the intimidation and chilling effects on a wider population, when that can be achieved with a small number of actual goons.

      • By QuantumFunnel 2026-03-1317:37

        Who needs rockets when you have autonomous mini drones

      • By dormento 2026-03-1317:16

        > It is also cheaper than ai rocket and more precise too

        Never stopped people overengineering :P

      • By rapind 2026-03-1316:37

        Wasn’t ICE pretty much doing exactly that with no oversight or accountability?

      • By motbus3 2026-03-1316:21

        Stop justifying more horrible stuff with "there is already some horrible stuff"

      • By ImPostingOnHN 2026-03-1316:03

        The government already does that. The only challenge is scale.

      • By pessimizer 2026-03-1316:39

        You're being silly, the missile thing was hyperbole. Your computer will direct the thugs to your door.

        > Nobody stops the government from sending goons to your door right now for a snarky comment.

        This is just dumb. They literally don't know who wrote it, and have to assign somebody to track you down. The fact that they're putting infrastructure on your computer and on the network to make this one click away for them matters.

      • By marcosdumay 2026-03-1315:362 reply

        The goons are. Almost no government can create goons that are submissive enough to comply with any kind of crazy order.

        • By XajniN 2026-03-1315:50

          Are you living under a rock?

    • By randusername 2026-03-1316:421 reply

      Not just governments, though.

      I've wondered if FaceID and the Android counterpart are actively creating an extraordinary labeled dataset for facial expressions at the point of sale.

      With users trained to scan their face before every transaction, tech companies could correlate transactions to facial expressions, facial expressions to emotions, and emotions to device content. I can imagine algorithms that subtly curate the user experience, selectively showing notifications, content, advertising to coax users towards "retail therapy".

      • By peyton 2026-03-1317:05

        Any webconferencing app on iOS probably fires up the TrueDepth camera to power background replacement and could conceivably do that, albeit not so responsively. Recommend heading to your provider and opting out of share-or-sell if you can.

        Also keep in mind keystroke dynamics can probably do that too and has been a topic of study in one form or another since the nineteenth century vis-a-vis telegraph operators.

    • By aesoh 2026-03-1317:53

      Interesting points! I see what you mean about age verification being used as a foundation for more signals in the OS. I think the tricky part is balancing privacy and verification — making sure applications can verify identity or age without over-collecting sensitive data. Biometric verification could be useful, but it also raises questions about how much control users have over their personal information. Curious to hear how you’d design it in a way that’s secure but respects user privacy.

    • By gzread 2026-03-1316:17

      The application has access to your entire home folder, isn't that enough information?

    • By ccvannorman 2026-03-1314:261 reply

      [flagged]

      • By inetknght 2026-03-1314:281 reply

        Buddy... I've been called a robot since long before AI became mainstream.

        • By scottyah 2026-03-1315:53

          Ha! We should have a T shirt with this.

    • By gruez 2026-03-1314:374 reply

      >Age signals from the OS? Need to provide a channel of information available to applications. Applications already talk to servers with unchecked commonality.

      This is a non-issue because it's almost certainly going to be gated behind a permission prompt. There are more invasive things sites/apps can ask for, and we seem to be doing fine, eg. location. Moreover is it really that much of a privacy loss if you go on steam, it asks you to verify you're over 18, and the OS says you're actually over 18?

      >Biometric data? Today it unlocks your private key. Tomorrow it's used to verify you are the same person that was used during sign-up -- the same that was "age-verified".

      Given touch id was introduced over a decade ago, and the associated doom-mongering predilections did not come to pass, I think it's fair to conclude it's a dud.

      • By vachina 2026-03-1315:071 reply

        > permission prompt

        Watch as apps refuse to work when you deny them permission. Also the OS (and “privileged apps”) don’t ask for permission, they have full unfettered access to everything already.

        • By gruez 2026-03-1316:001 reply

          >Also the OS (and “privileged apps”) don’t ask for permission, they have full unfettered access to everything already.

          If you can't trust the OS, you have bigger issues than it knowing whether you're 18 or not. At the very least it has a camera pointed at you at all moments you're using it, and can eavesdrop in all your conversations.

          • By Nevermark 2026-03-1316:07

            Of course you can trust an OS that is engineered against you.

            If your OS prevented encryption, because one of the anti-encryption laws got passed, would you still trust its privacy and security?

      • By sylos 2026-03-1316:18

        This is the doommongering coming to pass. Did it happen overnight? No! But you just provided the excuse! "gee see nothing bad came to pass. We can just use that tool"

      • By a456463 2026-03-1314:46

        I bet you are the same clown that also says that we don't need QA because there are no incidents in production

      • By inetknght 2026-03-1314:431 reply

        > This is a non-issue because it's almost certainly going to be gated behind a permission prompt.

        lol.

        > Moreover is it really that much of a privacy loss if you go on steam, it asks you to verify you're over 18, and the OS says you're actually over 18?

        Slippery slope, but an interesting argument. While SteamOS is a thing, Steam isn't my OS.

        > Given touch id was introduced over a decade ago, and the associated doom-mongering predilections did not come to pass, I think it's fair to conclude it's a dud.

        Really? You think that things built decades ago can't be further built-upon in the now or the future?

        • By gruez 2026-03-1316:04

          >Slippery slope, but an interesting argument. While SteamOS is a thing, Steam isn't my OS.

          You mean non slippery slope?

          >Really? You think that things built decades ago can't be further built-upon in the now or the future?

          If there's no deadlines for predilections, how can we score them? Should we still be worried about some yet undiscovered way that cell phones are causing cancer, despite decades of apparently no harmful side effects?

  • By Fiveplus 2026-03-1316:303 reply

    Anyone reading this purely as a child safety or campaign finance story might miss the broader architectural war happening here. If you zoom out a little, this is the inevitable, scorched-earth retaliation for Apple's ATT rollout from a few years back.

    Apple cost Meta billions by cutting off their data pipeline at the OS level, justifying it with a unilateral privacy moral high ground. Now, Meta is returning the favor. By astroturfing the App Store Accountability Act through digital childhood alliance, Meta is forcing Apple to build, maintain and also bear the legal liability for a wildly complex state-by-state identity verification API.

    Gotta give it to Zuck. Standing up a fully-fledged advocacy website 24 hours after domain registration and pushing a bill from a godaddy registration to a signed Utah law in just 77 days is terrifyingly efficient lobbying.

    • By john_strinlai 2026-03-1316:371 reply

      >Gotta give it to Zuck.

      if "it" is the middle finger, for sure. "terrifying" is a great choice of word for it.

      • By bigyabai 2026-03-1316:581 reply

        I was equally impressed/terrified by Apple's marketing blitz around client-side-scanning. So many people got paid to advocate for that, and the community barely convinced them it was a bad idea. There's not much hope left for any of FAANG deliberately resisting surveillance.

        • By classified 2026-03-1317:39

          Why would they resist surveillance? They're making massive profits from it.

    • By dfedbeef 2026-03-1316:42

      Idk the low road is generally the easier one.

    • By mentalgear 2026-03-1316:481 reply

      Well, I certainly prefer if big tech fight each other instead of the user as sometimes there might even come something good out of it - like elevated privacy in Apple's ATT case.

      Overall, that's the reason anti-trust laws must be applied rigorously, otherwise the normal population has no chance.

      • By mlyle 2026-03-1316:53

        Sometimes something good (ATT). Sometimes something bad (this terrible age-verification thing that is a huge barrier to entry for small entrants and comes with massive state surveillance risk).

        In the end, all the little people are just collateral damage or occasionally they get some collateral benefits from wherever the munitions land.

  • By jayers 2026-03-1316:511 reply

    I'm incredibly dubious of the conclusions of this researcher. Claude Opus was used to gather and analyze all of the data.

    I am not skeptical of any of the research, the sources seem to be cited properly. I am skeptical that this researcher has thought through or verified their conclusions in a systematic and reliable fashion. This part gives it away: "Research period: 2026-03-11 to present." This individual dropped his investigative report two days after beginning research!

    Yes, AI is an incredibly good research assistant and can help speed up the tasks of finding sources and indexing sources. The person behind this investigation has not actually done their due diligence to grok and analyze this data on their own, and therefore I can't trust that the AI analysis isn't poisoned by the prompters implicit biases.

    • By Aurornis 2026-03-1317:47

      I agree. I tried reading some of the documents and they're full of this:

      > LIMITATION: Direct PDF downloads returned 403 errors. ProPublica Schedule I viewer loads data dynamically (JavaScript), preventing extraction via WebFetch. The 2024 public disclosure copy on sixteenthirtyfund.org was also blocked.

      > Tech Transparency Project report: The article "Inside Meta's Spin Machine on Kids and Social Media" at techtransparencyproject.org likely contains detailed ConnectSafely/Meta funding analysis but was blocked (403)

      The least they could have done is read their own reports and then provided the documents to the LLM. Instead they just let it run and propose connections, asked it to generate some graphs, and then hit publish.

HackerNews