Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos • Hacker News Board

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#91

Post by djsumdog » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:42 PM UTC

baddox wrote: post #21

hombre_fatal wrote: post #2

>On Sunday, Matt Watson, a video blogger, posted a 20-minute clip detailing how comments on YouTube were used to identify certain videos in which young girls were in activities that could be construed as sexually suggestive, such as posing in front of a mirror and doing gymnastics. I looked at some of the videos that appeared in his report and it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my ow…

> it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my own sisters would shoot with our dad's camcorder. Your family camcorder videos probably weren't made available for checkout at the public library, filed under "young girls doing gymnastics" in the library's card catalog. If they were, I imagine your family and many members of the public would be creeped out or upset. > but what else do you do h…

I mean, there are probably people who buy DVDs of gymnastics events to get their jollies on it. Even in the VHS days, there were pros that would video competitions for parents and kids to buy if they wanted. It's not a new idea, the medium is just new.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#92

Post by darkpuma » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:42 PM UTC

stickfigure wrote: post #44

minikites wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cooperate with the authorities to find and investigate people who post creepy comments? You already can't post bomb threats online without getting an investigation.

Bomb threats are illegal. Creepy comments are not. This may be an awkward position to take in public, but I'm not comfortable with the idea of criminalizing "creepy comments", especially on the internet.

I once saw police notified because an employee was looking at gunbroker.com on a company computer. Looking at listings of guns for sale is not illegal, but it bothered the company enough that they called the police and a few questions were asked.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#93

Post by jtolds » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:42 PM UTC

I'm surprised that the comments here focus on any specific video and don't focus on the fact that YouTube starts recommending the next similar video.

YouTube has convinced me that recommendation systems are garbage in general. Try seeing what YouTube recommends to play after a few plays of searching for something historic like the moon landing.

We can't crowd source finding related videos and then shrug like this. This would not be nearly as big of a deal if YouTube's recommendation system was dropped entirely.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#94

Post by jjjensen90 » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:42 PM UTC

throwaway-1283 wrote: post #55

hombre_fatal wrote: post #2

>On Sunday, Matt Watson, a video blogger, posted a 20-minute clip detailing how comments on YouTube were used to identify certain videos in which young girls were in activities that could be construed as sexually suggestive, such as posing in front of a mirror and doing gymnastics. I looked at some of the videos that appeared in his report and it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my ow…

As much as I'm not a fan of "big govt" in many cases, I hope there is legislation that prohibits parents from sharing photos, videos, etc. of their kids publicly (e.g. a public IG account, a public YT channel) without consent (e.g. meaning the child would have to be of an age where they can even legally give consent). Children have the right to privacy, and it is crazy how many parents do not think twice before shari…

Many governments have made clear that children are unable to consent on their own to many things (the "Age of Consent" itself comes to mind), and before the age at which they are able to consent, their parents act as a steward of their consent. It does bring up an interesting line of thought though, which is that if we legislated that children (once adults) can consent to the release of their likeness/recordings of themselves, and they DO consent to sexually suggestive content as described in this post, can they also not consent to release fully nude/sexual content of themselves from when they were younger? Where along that line do they lose the ability to make informed consent decisions? I would also note that children also do not seem to have an expected right to privacy from their own parents, per cultural norms.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#95

Post by robbrown451 » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:43 PM UTC

dontbenebby wrote: post #18

hombre_fatal wrote: post #2

>On Sunday, Matt Watson, a video blogger, posted a 20-minute clip detailing how comments on YouTube were used to identify certain videos in which young girls were in activities that could be construed as sexually suggestive, such as posing in front of a mirror and doing gymnastics. I looked at some of the videos that appeared in his report and it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my ow…

> I'm sure these videos do attract some weirdos in the comments, and in the next paragraph Youtube says that they want to moderate that activity, but what else do you do here? Ban kids uploading a video of their innocent pool party because some creeps might enjoy it? What about topless babies? What about the rights of the children? Maybe they should have the right to wait and decide, upon adulthood, whether they want…

Well then you also need to make sure you don't take them outside. Especially not to a swimming pool, or let them participate in gymnastics. There could be creeps present, thinking bad thoughts.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#96

Post by Loughla » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:43 PM UTC

komali2 wrote: post #57

14 wrote: post #31

Youtube wants to cater to everyone but to me it is clear Youtube is a risky place for a child. I let my kids use the site but I have no expectations of anything less then we are seeing here and try to keep an eye from behind. But I myself have found these types of wormholes he talked about in the video. Searching for massage techniques and saw a pretty girl so clicked it then next thing I know I am down a worm hole o…

What I don't get is why the fringe community even exists - is there that large of a market of people with porn websites blocked, but youtube not blocked?

People at work?

Other than that, honestly, the only population I can come up with who would be watching these on youtube instead of an actual porn site would be kids.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#97

Post by Yntec » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:44 PM UTC

benj111 wrote: post #43

hombre_fatal wrote: post #2

>On Sunday, Matt Watson, a video blogger, posted a 20-minute clip detailing how comments on YouTube were used to identify certain videos in which young girls were in activities that could be construed as sexually suggestive, such as posing in front of a mirror and doing gymnastics. I looked at some of the videos that appeared in his report and it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my ow…

One thing my partner and I disagree about is taking pictures of our kids in the bath or paddling pool, on the basis they might end up in the public domain somewhere. My personal opinion is that it's the other guys problem, if they want to sexualise images of my kids, if I have to self sensor, we've already lost. But as my partner points out principles don't count for much if you've got pedos trading pictures of your…

As someone that found about this "wormhole" long time ago, I was very surprised about this video. Because all I saw was a cute girl stretching doing her gimnastics, and I found her cute, so I would watch something similar later on.

I found it really weird that he thinks those videos are an abomination, because, there's videos like these of cats being cute, and then Youtube algorithm is going show nothing but cute cat videos. Are we going the be escandalized because some people might have zoophilia and use those videos to masturbate or something?

It's ridiculous, at some point he shows his screen full of innocent little girl videos, and acts as if it's the most disgusting thing. Little girls being disgusting. I don't get it.

I never read the comments, but I never imagined pedophiles looking at these videos at all, because, I expected them to be looking at actually sexual stuff, or whatever. So there's this video of a cute little girl showing how she decorated her room and it has millions of views, am I supposed to believe that there were millions of people on there seeing sexual content where there was none?

The saddest part of all this was all the comments on the video, agreeing with the guy that "this was awful", calling perfectly fine videos of little girl "softcore porn". If they see an innocent video of a little girl eating ice cream and weird thoughts cross their mind, it's their problem.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#98

Post by vibrato » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:45 PM UTC

At some point, social media companies need to realize that they ARE utilities. They should not attempt to control their content, rather, law enforcement should prosecute illegal usage.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#99

Post by ceejayoz » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:45 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #39

baddox wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my own sisters would shoot with our dad's camcorder. Your family camcorder videos probably weren't made available for checkout at the public library, filed under "young girls doing gymnastics" in the library's card catalog. If they were, I imagine your family and many members of the public would be creeped out or upset. > but what else do you do h…

but what else do you do here? Not attempt to monetize your family videos. Disable ads on your own videos.[1] [1] http://orgspring.com/turn-off-ads-youtube-videos/

That solves the issue from the advertisers' perspective.

It doesn't solve the "pedos are looking at my kid" side of things.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#100

Post by tobr » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:46 PM UTC

ipsum2 wrote: post #37

acl2149 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure that analogy makes sense. YouTube makes it pretty clear you are publishing your video to the public when you upload the file. You actually have to confirm the video is going to be public. It's not like YouTube is raiding the family archives for the content

> YouTube makes it pretty clear you are publishing your video to the public when you upload the file After working in tech for long enough, you realize that no one reads anything, even if its absolutely clear in the UI. And they will blame you for it.

Things are not clear just because they have been spelled out in text. I don’t think this has anything to do with tech, except that tech tends to be full of abstract concepts that are difficult to understand.