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

181–190 of 316 posts

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

#181

Post by darkpuma »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #180
darkpuma wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's pretty standard content in the ASMR-sphere. The "ASMR-sphere" is soft-core pornography in denial. "No you've got it all wrong, I watch it because it gives me a tingling feeling..." Yeah I'm sure it does.

Spoken like someone who doesn't experience the physiological ASMR response. As someone who does experience it, you're obviously speaking nonsense.

Even if this supposed physiological response exists, that doesn't make the content any less fundementally pornographic.

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

#182

Post by robbrown451 »

diminoten wrote: post #153
AnaniasAnanas wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Well I'm talking about how I prioritize decisions about protecting my own daughter from harm from others, not about whether it is ok for me to look at / think about other people's daughters.

Given that, if I sound like a pedophile, to me that says more about the listener than the speaker.

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

#183

Post by hackinthebochs »

darkpuma wrote: post #181
hackinthebochs wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoken like someone who doesn't experience the physiological ASMR response. As someone who does experience it, you're obviously speaking nonsense.

Even if this supposed physiological response exists, that doesn't make the content any less fundementally pornographic.

Now you're just resorting to begging the question.

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

#184

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #163
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Some loose similarities does not establish the sexual nature of these kind of videos.

>loose similarities

Without sex or nudity, how do you purpose you'd make it more similar?

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

#185

Post by Yntec »

fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #80
1024core wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But are you sure that no one on this planet would consider it as "kids having fun"? YT is a global medium. Just because you (or even the majority of people) are offended, it doesn't mean that everyone should be.

A 12 year old girl, whispering in a sexual manner, wearing a stripper style police outfit, saying things like "I need to leave for my tinder date tonight" and "this is never happening" while pointing at the camera and herself. (and that's just the first 30 seconds) I'm sorry If you think that's "kids having fun" you belong on a cross. Edit (more details on exactly why this is wrong): It's shot in the style of POV por…

Sorry, but none of that is sexual, let's get to it point by point:

-Police costumes aren't sexual

-Whispering isn't sexual

-Date jokes aren't sexual

-Point Of View camera angles aren't sexual

-Being male is not sexual (if it was a female, you could flip the argument and claim it's for lesbians)

-Omitting name isn't sexual

-Arresting people with handcuff isn't sexual

-Makeup and press on nails aren't sexual

-Finally, keeping immersion that it's the viewer isn't sexual, because this would require something else to be.

What I think is happening, and I could be wrong, but, perhaps you've watched porn with a similar setup about some policegirl fetish? Your brain can't but associate the two and see them as the same? You've seen setups like this that the only way you can imagine for the video to continue is of the sexual kind?

Nothing alarming is actually happening. And I didn't notice her chest area was open until you pointed it out, so the video isn't the problem.

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

#186

Post by hackinthebochs »

fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #184
hackinthebochs wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some loose similarities does not establish the sexual nature of these kind of videos.

>loose similarities Without sex or nudity, how do you purpose you'd make it more similar?

I'm not sure what you're asking. The argument was attempting to use a similarity to establish the pornographic nature of the content. My point was that a loose similarity doesn't prove his claim.

Establishing a criteria for pornography is hard, but the usual metric seems relevant: designed to sexually arouse and otherwise devoid of value. But roleplay ASMR content presumably isn't designed to sexually arouse, and has other value for those who experience a physiological ASMR response from it.

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

#187

Post by ehsankia »

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…

You're assuming that these people don't want their videos public. Even if it's true for some, clearly some of these uploaders do want their videos public, so your solution doesn't generally solve the problem.

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

#188

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

raldi wrote: post #129
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…

The recommendation algorithm should distinguish between viewers who happen upon a video like this once in a while and viewers who binge-watch them, and disregard the latter when putting together input for the algorithm that determines what shows up in people's "Watch Next" sidebars. They could also detect links to compromising timestamps in the comments, take them down, and shut down the accounts that post them. It's…

What do you do know? Just curious [=

That's a really cool idea.

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

#189

Post by darkpuma »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #183
darkpuma wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if this supposed physiological response exists, that doesn't make the content any less fundementally pornographic.

Now you're just resorting to begging the question.

I'm not interested in engaging you with formal logic. I'm making a hard assertion. This content is pornographic in nature and anybody who enjoys watching children do it is a creep who should be segregated from the rest of society.

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

#190

Post by beerlord »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #178
beerlord wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not the videos being there, its the advertisments next to them. Youtube simply needs to move to a proper gatekeeping model around monetisation, requiring human review and biannual review checks. Start it at 10,000 subscribers to avoid being overwhelmed. Prompt once-off approval for 'viral' trending videos from new channels (even if the advertising money goes completely to Youtube). The internet is matu…

What does monetization have to do with any of this, except as a hook to attack youtube and bait advertisers to respond? Monetization is entirely irrelevant to the problematic issues at play.

All of the means to attack Youtube have been centred on questionable video content being supported with ads from mainstream companies.

Youtube should have wisened up and become a lot more selective of which videos were supplied with ads.

And if running slightly fewer ads is too commecially difficult, then save costs by limiting new uploads to 720p.

Post reply on HN