251–260 of 290 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I beg do differ. When I was a kid I used to have a YouTube channel with AdSense. Difference being I actually read the ToS and decided that it would be my parents channel, only I would be recording. Never clicked on my channels ads (in fact that's when I started using AdBlockers, for the sole purpose of not generating fraudulent ad revenue). Reading at 16 years old is not that hard. I created that YouTube channel much…
Are you making the claim that since you didn't make a mistake at 16 that no other 16 yo can make mistakes? As well as the claim that any mistakes made at 16 means that the person will forever repeat those same mistakes for life?
No.
> As well as the claim that any mistakes made at 16 means that the person will forever repeat those same mistakes for life?
No.
I said that since I didn't make that mistake much before 16 years old (13 or so) then it's possible for a 16 years old to not make the same mistake. That's about reading ToS, defrauding Google is a whole other can of worms.
I also didn't say they will make the same mistakes for life, only that they shouldn't get another chance. Google has no reason from their point of view to give access to their platform to someone who once tried to defraud them and put them in several liabilities related to child labor and exploitation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you making the claim that since you didn't make a mistake at 16 that no other 16 yo can make mistakes? As well as the claim that any mistakes made at 16 means that the person will forever repeat those same mistakes for life?
He spent his teenage years reading terms and conditions, let not pretend he didn't make mistakes.
I spent 15 minutes or so reading a document which I'm obligated to read to sign a contract and discovered I myself couldn't do it and so passed that to someone else.
> lets not pretend he didn't make mistakes
That's true. I do have multiple regrets too. Reading terms of services isn't one though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I beg do differ. When I was a kid I used to have a YouTube channel with AdSense. Difference being I actually read the ToS and decided that it would be my parents channel, only I would be recording. Never clicked on my channels ads (in fact that's when I started using AdBlockers, for the sole purpose of not generating fraudulent ad revenue). Reading at 16 years old is not that hard. I created that YouTube channel much…
This idea of never forgive, never forget is why the USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Punishment is the singular goal, and rehabilitation is considered weakness. This kind of thinking is antisocial and serves no purpose other than some kind of revenge fantasy.
> This kind of thinking is antisocial and serves no purpose other than some kind of revenge fantasy.
When it comes to putting someone in prison I agree 100%. When it comes to the right of a bussiness to reject a customer I disagree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I beg do differ. When I was a kid I used to have a YouTube channel with AdSense. Difference being I actually read the ToS and decided that it would be my parents channel, only I would be recording. Never clicked on my channels ads (in fact that's when I started using AdBlockers, for the sole purpose of not generating fraudulent ad revenue). Reading at 16 years old is not that hard. I created that YouTube channel much…
but... you also committed fraud, you just got away with it...
In fact when we were considering AdWords we got in touch with a local AdWords representative (yes, Google has support, but only for the business they care about) and we talked about a lot of this stuff.
Please tell me if I'm missing something and I'll be happy to retract what I've said.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As a business you shouldn't have to give second chances to people who blatantly defraud you Just to point the obvious, but corporations do not have any inherent right, and this specific one is already denied on some circumstances.
Corporations are people too
Issues like this wouldn't exist if verification was required upfront. If you need to be at least 18 to use a particular service, and they're going to verify at some point , that point should be at the very start.
This sounds like exploitation of minors: let them create an account that generates revenue, but only kickban them when it suits the company
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The escape hatch is the parent opening the account in their own name. Companies don't have a choice here: Someone under 18 can not enter into a contract, there's nothing really they can do.
Hmm, in Germany children and teens can still enter contracts, as long as they are able to pay it with their monthly pocket money. Every single thing you buy here in a supermarket is also an implicit contract (Kaufvertrag). So, you could theoretically rent servers and buy ad space on Adsense as long your pocket money covers it. On the other hand: this is a liability for Google and $provider -- as most of them are post…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The word dystopia comes from analysis of fiction.
The definition is "imagined state or society great suffering or injustice" -- Google cannot cause you great suffering or injustice because it has little to no power over you. Only a government or similar can truly cause great suffering en masse.