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

YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 261 posts

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#181

Post by fieldcny »

ggggtez wrote: post #160
lillesvin wrote: post #151

My daughter (9) got a phone recently and we're kinda managing it through Google's Family Link and it absolutely sucks in pretty much all regards. We're only interested in absolutely minimal control just to make sure she doesn't install something stupid/dangerous, other than that we trust her to use YouTube and the likes responsibly, but that's not The Google Way. YouTube Kids was the first thing that bothered me. Goo…

The problem you have is that you created a Family Link account and thereby told google that your child was under 13. This is intended to meet legal liabilities, and the most egregious helicopter parents needs. And due to the Childs Online Privacy Protection Act, pretty much any app that uses advertising has terms of service that prevent children from using it. You want Family Link to be less restrictive, but apparent…

Not to jump to conclusions, but I think you are conflating a couple issues here, COPA exists and seeks to among other things prevent data collection of/on minors.

Googles implementation of family link is a ridiculously ham handed implementation of a walled garden type approach which is so bad it’s hard to imagine it is not purposefully designed to push folks to just lie about their children’s age.

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#182

Post by ensignavenger »

Spooky23 wrote: post #147
ensignavenger wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are those who would say that that human should be a parental unit.

Those who are a parent would say that those who do have no idea.

That would depend a lot on the parent. I know plenty of parents who would agree.

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#183

Post by hcurtiss »

lillesvin wrote: post #151

My daughter (9) got a phone recently and we're kinda managing it through Google's Family Link and it absolutely sucks in pretty much all regards. We're only interested in absolutely minimal control just to make sure she doesn't install something stupid/dangerous, other than that we trust her to use YouTube and the likes responsibly, but that's not The Google Way. YouTube Kids was the first thing that bothered me. Goo…

For what it's worth, having tried both on two kids ages 8 and 10, I found iOS's parental controls through Screen Time infinitely better. The Apple walled garden definitely has its down sides, but the ability to fluidly manage the content my kids can access on their iPads is actually terrific. You can't control YouTube, but we haven't let our kids access YouTube at all yet without requesting access to individual pages (usually assigned by their teachers).

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#184

Post by emodendroket »

axaxs wrote: post #18
Bellamy wrote: post #11

Bigger problem is the parents who let their children watch youtube or whatever way too much.

I'm curious of the long term effects. Like you, I also think it's a disgrace. I had a friend who to me basically seemed like they didn't like dealing with kids, so just gave her daughter a tablet she was glued to at all times. I mean, young, I don't remember the age now but less than 2? She never made eye contact or any noise, just messing with the tablet. I can't help but think there's going to be a whole generation…

I can't be the only person here who spent their youth glued to a computer, can I?

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#185

Post by tentacleuno »

duxup wrote: post #16
briga wrote: post #5

I would agree with the assessment, but isn't your typical kids TV channel just as vapid? Are US lawmakers worried about the ads and commercialism we bombard our children with on conventional television?

Depends on the channel. We have a dedicated public television channel where I am and the content is significantly better than YouTube: https://pbskids.org/ My kids will tell me about history and science that they pick up from those shows. I don't think I've ever heard anything from them that I liked when it came to YouTube content.

Everyone on here seems to be blowing the trumpet for PBS Kids. Is it really that good? I haven't checked it.

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#186

Post by ruffrey »

drewcon wrote: post #21

Can confirm. There is a strain of video (below) on there that is just like perceptual candy to kids. And there are LOADS of these videos in slightly different versions. My own anecdote: Our 2 year old found these videos (3 years ago): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7IsNFDtG4U&list=PLHZrFxrJbt... At first we were like "seems fine, colors and shapes...keeps him engaged". After a month or two he could just stare slack…

This, a hundred times. YouTube kids has content addiction to a science. My kid still asks for YouTube at age 6. It’s been banned from our house since he was 3.

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#187

Post by charcircuit »

tyree731 wrote: post #178
charcircuit wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>really make it hard for quality content to succeed It's the opposite. Quality content goes viral where bad content will stop getting recommended to people. >Cheap and almost copied content gets rewarded the most What gets rewarded the most is entertaining videos. YouTube doesn't care if that video took 10 minutes to make or 10 months. It just sees how good the video is at entertaining people.

You said it yourself, it isn’t quality content that gets rewarded, it’s entertaining content or, more specifically, content that gets you engaged. So it isn’t the opposite, it’s their point exactly.

The parent implied that quality content was at a disadvantage by the algorithm when that is just not the case. I believe that quality content is correlated with its entertainment value.

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#188

Post by ggggtez »

fieldcny wrote: post #181
ggggtez wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem you have is that you created a Family Link account and thereby told google that your child was under 13. This is intended to meet legal liabilities, and the most egregious helicopter parents needs. And due to the Childs Online Privacy Protection Act, pretty much any app that uses advertising has terms of service that prevent children from using it. You want Family Link to be less restrictive, but apparent…

Not to jump to conclusions, but I think you are conflating a couple issues here, COPA exists and seeks to among other things prevent data collection of/on minors. Googles implementation of family link is a ridiculously ham handed implementation of a walled garden type approach which is so bad it’s hard to imagine it is not purposefully designed to push folks to just lie about their children’s age.

This is not a conflation. Think it through: Google Play, YouTube, Google Music... these all perform advertising.

And then look at the actual parent article that we're talking about. It's all about how YouTube Kids includes too many videos that feature advertising. I think the connection is very clear.

Once you've accepted that the link is there, then it almost becomes impossible to imagine that it would work any other way. If they didn't hide the install button for YT, then lawmakers would probably say that Google intentionally is trying to get parents to install the real app (and the advertising that comes along with it). If the product does anything right, it'll be said it's making money from children.

If it was me: yes, I'd just lie about my kids age and move on with my life. Maybe that's just my anti-nanny-ware belief system, but I don't think it's appropriate to monitor children like that. I think either you trust them to be responsible online, or you don't. In your case, you do, so my suggestion is to just let them use the fully unlocked device. If they install malware, then wipe the phone. That's just part of life.

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#189

Post by indymike »

makomk wrote: post #137
indymike wrote: post #118

My kids HATE YouTube kids. It's utterly devoid of actual content, and I suspect it's sole reason for existence is to force parents to help their children lie about their age so they can access actual content on real YouTube. Google's family features really are quite terrible... For example, with Google Family, kids can't log into Google Play Games which blocks most games on Android, once again giving parents the choi…

The trouble is that due to COPPA and probably similar laws in other countries, there are huge legal headaches involved in offering any kind of online account to under-13s - especially one which is shared with a whole bunch of third parties like Google Play Games is every time you log into a game. So I can't imagine Google changing that any time soon. Even just offering content that under-13s might plausibly set up ad…

I don't think you are understanding the issue:

1. Kid can't login to google play games and can't play some games and can't save progress in other games.

2. Kid gets parent to change their age or kid registers an adult google account outside of family controls.

3. Kid can now play games and save progress, etc. In all cases, parents lose controls and kid can spend money with impunity on family account (if you change their age).

Re: YouTube Kids a “vapid wasteland” say US lawmakers

#190

Post by detaro »

indymike wrote: post #189
makomk wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble is that due to COPPA and probably similar laws in other countries, there are huge legal headaches involved in offering any kind of online account to under-13s - especially one which is shared with a whole bunch of third parties like Google Play Games is every time you log into a game. So I can't imagine Google changing that any time soon. Even just offering content that under-13s might plausibly set up ad…

I don't think you are understanding the issue: 1. Kid can't login to google play games and can't play some games and can't save progress in other games. 2. Kid gets parent to change their age or kid registers an adult google account outside of family controls. 3. Kid can now play games and save progress, etc. In all cases, parents lose controls and kid can spend money with impunity on family account (if you change th…

And parents point is that if congress or the federal government comes knocking, Google can point and say "we offer a compliant kids account, the customer choose to break the ToS and lie to us! we can't do much against that!". Whereas if they allow something deemed "bad" on the official kids accounts, Google gets the blame. So it's easier for them to just do a safe-as-possible kids version, picking "safety" over usability.
Post reply on HN