Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 316 posts

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

#151

Post by Someone1234 »

jasonjayr wrote: post #133
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…

I learned the hard way that youtube is not useful for sharing family videos with a limited audience (ie: immediate family. 10 people, tops.). I uploaded my children's dance recital video, as an unlisted video, and earned myself a copyright strike because of the background music.

Copyright strikes are automatic, and you can dispute ones like that as fair usage.

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

#152

Post by AJ007 »

jtolds wrote: post #93

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. Th…

I strongly agree that the serious issue here is Youtube's recommendation system. There is nothing inherently wrong with recommendation systems. There is a problem when they are optimized for maximum view time with a disregard to content. Youtube's flaws are magnified further because users are being paid by Google for the content they create, rewarding them to make even more videos the recommendation engine likes.

Here is another timely example brought to you by Youtube also published today:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/carolineodonovan/youtub...

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

#153

Post by diminoten »

AnaniasAnanas wrote: post #126
diminoten wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing is, even if someone is a perv and gets off on this sort of thing, it isn't endangering her. Careful with that idea, it's some pretty enablist shit, and you most frequently hear it coming from the perverts themselves.

What matters is if it is wrong or not, not who says it.

Yes, hence the "is enablist shit"...

And no, being lumped in with pedophiles matters. I am trying to warn him who he sounds like, not making a rational argument against his position. It's up to him to decide if he wants to sound like a pedophile.

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

#154

Post by djsumdog »

nopriorarrests wrote: post #49
hombre_fatal wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My issue is that whenever the topic of "child exploitation" comes up, there's always a lack of specifics. Both the specifics of what we're actually referring to and the specifics of an actual solution. Instead, everyone (like every media outlet and internet comment) casts a vote against "child exploitation". Who wouldn't? And the discussion stops there. "Whatever they're doing, it needs to stop!" For example, I bet m…

Lets be specific. My first question -- so, 12 y.o. girl being dressed in police uniform and acting like in an opening of a cheesy porn movie is your definition of "just kids having fun"?

So is the girl in this video .. deciding to make this herself? Like she saw other examples of this, with adults, and then decided to do this as a child, was somehow a good idea? In that linked video the guy reacting points out the terrible Tinder joke. So therefore, she's aware to some extend how fucked up this is right? ...

I realize some of these kids make tons from ads on these videos .. but at some point ... that's just bad parenting. Like what are you teaching your child?

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

#155

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #145
nopriorarrests wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have an answer. But what I can tell is that video I linked above... I'll give 99% probability easily, that this video was made for purpose, with sexual context in mind, most probably by some adult person, not another kid, and it is not "just kid having fun", and it's not "family video". This is softcore erotica with 12-14 y.o. girl, and it was made to be a softcore erotica. There is literally zero other reaso…

If you don't know anything about ASMR you might think that. But that's pretty standard content in the ASMR-sphere. The only difference is that it's being made by a preteen.

>If you don't know anything about porn you might think that. But that's pretty standard content in the porn-sphere. The only difference is that it's being made by a preteen.

is also true.

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

#156

Post by taneq »

tptacek wrote: post #135
ipsum2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

As well they should, because (the hypothetical) you built and deployed something that relied for safety on users doing something you knew they wouldn't do.

So in your world, we should just never give users nice things because we know they're stupid?

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

#157

Post by Waterluvian »

robbrown451 wrote: post #119
kelnos wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While certainly child predators are an issue, I don't even need to consider this sort of thing from that angle. Why do you need to post publicly rather than marking it as unlisted and sharing the link with people you know and trust? Would you personally like to have a video posted of you in your underwear? Even if that's okay with you, perhaps your daughter will grow up preferring to have a more private life, and to…

As far as underwear goes, no I wouldn't care if I was under age 3 in the photo. Seeing a kid in a diaper is an everyday public thing. In that case, she was in a diaper rather than a bathing suit because she was still diaper age. I don't see it remotely as something to be embarrassed about. I don't "need" to post publicly but I also have no reason not to. I'm not going to let people having creepy thoughts control my l…

Have you considered that your child might really regret all this stuff you're publishing about them when they're older?

I don't exactly care myself but I do appreciate that my kid isn't capable of consenting to having his childhood published. So I don't do it.

It seems really odd that you're reason for making that call is, "meh, why not?"

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

#158

Post by alanlamm »

I am surprised at how few of the comments here say - if parents and/or kids want to make non-sexual videos public, fine. If paedophiles are aroused by them nometheless, fine too (as long as they do so privately and don't harrass the kids). I don't know why one would presume to have a 'right not to incite arousal' in another. Personally, I'd choose paedophiles enjoying videos of my children over censorship by large american corporations any day.

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

#159

Post by robbrown451 »

underwater wrote: post #137
robbrown451 wrote: post #67

This just seems ridiculous. I post a lot of videos of my daughter to share with my family and friends, and generally don't care who looks at them any more than I care who looks at her (or what they are thinking) when we are in public. I've gotten a couple creepy comments here and there from random people who found them. (the comments weren't overtly sexual though, but I deleted them anyway) Here's an example of a har…

> The thing is, even if someone is a perv and gets off on this sort of thing, it isn't endangering her. I'm not going to lose sleep over it. But... it's a video of her, not of you. Is she going to lose sleep over it if in five years she goes on YouTube and discovers someone has cloned and monetized the video, and a bunch of creeps have commented on it?

Well I'm her parent and I get to make such decisions for now. That's how it works. If I had any concern whatsoever that she might be embarrassed about something I post, I'd take that into consideration, but I'm not.

Someone could video her at a playground, and post it on YouTube. Should I not take her to the playground out of fear of that?

Honestly, I think I'm probably more concerned than most other parents, since they put their daughters in skirts and let them play on the monkeybars, while I tend to dress her in pants when she is going to be doing that sort of thing. But it's probably more out of concern for other dads, who (thanks to all the hand wringing about this sort of thing) tend to feel like everyone is on the lookout for someone who is creepy.

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

#160

Post by jaimex2 »

itronitron wrote: post #32
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…

YouTube should just disable comments on all videos

I agree. They provide nothing constructive.
Post reply on HN