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

191–200 of 316 posts

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

#191

Post by nitwit005 »

kelnos wrote: post #88
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…

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…

> Why do you need to post publicly rather than marking it as unlisted and sharing the link with people you know and trust?

Not always realistic. If you record some boyscouts event, you probably don't know the name of everyone there, let alone account information. People often email a link, and then people share it by forwarding it.

Alternatively, of course, you could upload it to some website for your organization, but again it'd generally need to be public, or you have the usual IT horror of getting everyone an account and dealing with people who say they can't log in. There is a reason people just toss it on YouTube.

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

#192

Post by ehsankia »

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 of these videos are uploaded by the kid themselves, no? Above 13, you're allowed to have your own account and upload videos. Even if the parent uploaded videos are removed, it still doesn't fully solve the problem.

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

#193

Post by psychometry »

robbrown451 wrote: post #82
malvosenior wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I ask why you would make those videos public, instead of private and sharing them with just people you know?

Because a few people subscribe (family and friends), and I put them in a playlist, and so on. I mean, I don't care. She's just playing at the playground. I didn't think about it at the time, I guess I could, but I don't see why it matters. If I was concerned about anything, it would be about creepy people seeing her in the real world.

After reading all of your comments hear, the only image I can form of you is a a guy with his hands over his ears yelling "I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" You need to wise up. Before you read this article, you were naïve like many parents, but now you're just being wilfully ignorant by continuing to defend these videos being public.

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

#194

Post by robbrown451 »

movedx wrote: post #118
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…

I personally think you're missing the point of the article. The content of your videos (based on the example you gave) are harmless. Adorable, in fact. You have a beautiful daughter - congrats. Sadly you're missing the point that you did the uploading, not her. The article is about children, I'd say around 11-14 in age on average, possibly late teens too, uploading videos of themselves... themselves. And the videos a…

> You have a beautiful daughter - congrats.

Creep!!! Just kidding.... Thanks, she's the best. :)

Point taken. I get a bit defensive here and there, and I guess what I'm more defensive about is reflected more here in the comments, where people are so quick to shame parents for not being so worried about things that I think are non-issues. (note that I am a bit of an outlier at Hacker News, in that I am in general not particularly concerned about privacy...in the sense that I don't worry about, say, Amazon following me around the web because they have figured out that I am in the market for digital pianos and skateboard parts)

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

#195

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #186
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

I can't think of a single element to add that would make it more similar to pornography without it being actual pornography. I believe that it is as similar as is possible, and getting so close cannot be accidental. I assert that if you can think of something that would make it more similar your premise that the similarity is loose may hold water, if not however it would seem that I'm correct and the similarly is uncanny.

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

#196

Post by movedx »

brianpgordon wrote: post #161
movedx wrote: post #107

An eleven year old shouldn't be uploading content to YouTube. An eleven year old doesn't understand the second or third order consequences of their actions when they upload a video of themselves, along with their friends, trying on bikinis in their bedrooms. If you're under 16, your content, and the uploading of it, should be supervised. Why are we letting our children run free on the Internet? You wouldn't let them…

My 10-15 year old self would hate you. Most of what I even remember about being that age from my involvement in various online communities. I didn't have many friends at school so I talked to people in games and chat instead. To suggest that my parents should have to be there to "supervise" me is absurd. To some extent they tried to do this, and I resented it and I'm certain that it did no good at all. Not least beca…

> Interacting online isn't any different

Except a school is a (mostly) sealed environment. The Internet is not. Anyone can join the conversation online. Not just anyone can walk into a school classroom and pretend to be a teenager to social engineer a young girl.

> Cutting them off from the network is like giving them a lobotomy.

I didn't say cut them off.

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

#197

Post by hackinthebochs »

fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #195
hackinthebochs wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I can't think of a single element to add that would make it more similar to pornography without it being actual pornography. I believe that it is as similar as is possible, and getting so close cannot be accidental. I assert that if you can think of something that would make it more similar your premise that the similarity is loose may hold water, if not however it would seem that I'm correct and the similarly is unc…

>I can't think of a single element to add

How about explicit language?

>and getting so close cannot be accidental

Probably because sexual arousal and ASMR are both physiological responses.

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

#198

Post by Guest192392 »

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 think the discussion is important, because something needs to be done. It's a scary situation going on.

Yes, the videos are kids being themselves, and typically uploaded by the children. However, then these predators show up pretending to be other children, and they talk these kids into doing more explicit and inappropriate things. They ask children to film a video sucking on a lollipop, they ask them to make a video showing how to do the splits, or they ask them to make a video playing twister with their sister. I even saw them asking children to do the "toothpaste challenge", where they try to get them to fill their mouth with toothpaste so it looks like cum. If I start typing "toothpaste challenge" YouTube autocompletes "toothpaste challenge drool", "toothpaste challenge tongue", "toothpaste challenge little girl", "toothpaste challenge girls".

These kids don't know any better. They make 50 videos that all have 50 views, then they make a yoga video and it gets recommended over and over again to predators, and they end up with one million views. Then the above situation unfolds where they're requested to make more inappropriate content, or the children realize their gymnastics videos are by far the most popular, so they make more, and more. They think they're making tutorials for other children, but the other side of the camera is just thousands of predators watching and pushing them to go further. Then they start trying to trade contact information with the children to get them off the site.

I don't know how you fix the problem, but it is a problem. We're talking about videos with millions of views here. It's not one or two people trying to exploit these children, it's literally hundreds of thousands, and I think the kids need some help protecting themselves.

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

#199

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #197
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think of a single element to add that would make it more similar to pornography without it being actual pornography. I believe that it is as similar as is possible, and getting so close cannot be accidental. I assert that if you can think of something that would make it more similar your premise that the similarity is loose may hold water, if not however it would seem that I'm correct and the similarly is unc…

>I can't think of a single element to add How about explicit language? >and getting so close cannot be accidental Probably because sexual arousal and ASMR are both physiological responses.

>How about explicit language?

Can you point to another piece of media, say something on the Disney Channel, where adding a few curse words would turn that production from innocent children's entertainment into soft core pornography? If not why is that a unique feature to this particular video?

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

#200

Post by gubbrora »

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?

School / company network with content blocker?
Post reply on HN