UK Discord users were part of a Peter Thiel-linked data collection experiment

Concerns about Discord’s age verification and data handling

• Commenters unpack two paths: a local, on-device selfie-based age check (k-id) and an escalation path where users upload ID documents, previously via Zendesk and now (briefly) via Persona.
• The major fear is around ID documents linking real-world identity to Discord accounts, especially given a prior Zendesk-related leak. Selfies are seen as less sensitive than full IDs.
• People note that Discord quietly added and then removed references to a UK “experiment” with Persona and adjusted FAQ language, which is read as improvisational and non-transparent.
• Many assume any such vendor will retain or monetize data despite claims of “quick deletion,” and regard reassurances as non-credible given past industry behavior.

Debate over Thiel/Palantir linkage and guilt by association

• One side argues that highlighting Peter Thiel or Palantir is mostly rhetorical: funding via Founders Fund is a weak link, and by that standard vast swaths of tech would be “tainted.”
• Others say Thiel/Palantir have such a toxic surveillance-and-politics reputation that any association is a serious red flag, regardless of direct evidence of data sharing.
• Some stress that ownership stakes create the possibility of meddling and portfolio-level data sharing, which is enough to worry users whose data could be used for immigration or law-enforcement targeting.
• A counterview likens current Palantir discourse to conspiracism: people readily assume the worst without concrete proof.

Motives and incentives for age verification/KYC

• Several commenters doubt age checks are truly about child protection; they see them as driven by regulatory compliance, liability reduction, and data harvesting.
• There’s discussion of weak incentives to store KYC data securely versus strong incentives to cut corners; others note KYC vendors are replaceable, so leaks can have real business costs.

Public-sector use and broader political–economic framing

• Palantir’s work with the UK NHS, police forces, and foreign governments is cited as evidence of deep state-surveillance entanglement; others reply that it’s “just another big vendor” like cloud providers.
• Some frame the situation as a stage of capitalism: initial market consolidation followed by regulatory capture where billionaires push laws that mandate using their products.
• There’s also a thread arguing the core issue is children’s unsupervised device access; age-gating tech is seen as a downstream, privacy-hostile response to that social change.

Technical alternatives and skepticism

• Commenters note that cryptographic or zero-knowledge age proofs, or token systems issued after in-person ID checks, could solve age verification with far less data exposure.
• Others respond that implementers will be tempted to build in re-identifiability or tracking, undermining the privacy benefits.