An overly broad age assurance law in Mississippi is leading to arguments about which platforms — Bluesky, Mastodon, or others — offer the best solution for avoiding crackdowns on internet freedoms.
The company that makes the Bluesky social app announced last week that it would block access to its service in the state of Mississippi rather than comply with the new age verification law. In a blog post, the company explained that, as a small team, it lacked the resources to implement the substantial technical changes required by the law, and it raised concerns about the law’s broad scope and potential privacy implications.
The law, HB 1126, requires platforms to implement age verification for all users before they can access social networks like Bluesky. Recently, the Supreme Court justices decided to block an emergency appeal that would have prevented the law from going into effect as the legal challenges it faces played out in the courts. This forced Bluesky to make a decision of its own: either comply or risk hefty fines of up to $10,000 per user.
Users in Mississippi soon scrambled for a workaround, which tends to involve the use of VPNs.
However, others questioned why a VPN would be the necessary solution here. After all, decentralized social networking was meant to reduce the control and power the state — or any authority — would have over these social platforms.
Image Credits:Screenshot from Mastodon
On Mastodon, the decentralized social network running the ActivityPub protocol, founder Eugen Rochko responded to the announcement from Bluesky by taking a bit of a potshot at the rival social network.
“And this is why real decentralization matters,” he wrote. “There is nobody that can decide for the fediverse to block Mississippi.”
Techcrunch event
San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025
This prompted a response from Techdirt founder and Bluesky board member Mike Masnick, who said Rochko’s statement was “potentially misleading.”
“Both because others can host their own views of the network,” he pointed out, but also will the largest instances, which you run, be willing to pay the $10k/user fines in Mississippi? Because the state can still go after instances, no?” (He’s referring to the large instance, or server, called mastodon.social, which Rochko also runs.)
TechCrunch reached out to Mastodon to confirm whether it would comply with the law on the mastodon.social instance, and we didn’t hear back by time of publication. But the law was written in a way that a Mastodon instance could seemingly become a target — as could a “message boa …