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

YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 156 posts

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#61

Post by jan_g »

dmix wrote: post #19
14 wrote: post #2

I for one am glad at this though I am sure the fine could have been exponentially larger. The fact that YouTube can go here and say their platform is only intended for 13 year olds and up is a joke. Their are thousands of shows targeted directly at my kids. I can even clearly hear one video my kid likes to watch starts out with saying “look kids” so tell me how that is not directed at kids. I use an adblocker but whe…

Isn't there a YouTube kids version? I'm not a parent so I've never used it and I've been curious since I also see that Netflix had a cordoned off sections for kids too. I'm not sure if these are sufficient content and feature wise? Also is there any parental consent thing going on here as well with how YouTube words it? I remember seeing plenty of adult ads as a kid watching TV at night time watching with my parents.…

There is and any parent giving their phone/tablet to young kids should at minimum make sure it's YouTube Kids they're watching. It doesn't have ads or comments section, for example. As for its content being sufficiently filtered or not - nowadays I think it is.

We, the parents, should of course try to minimize the amount of time our kids spend with youtube or in general with phones/tablets/TVs.

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#62

Post by Eli_P »

dmix wrote: post #45
wongarsu wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, just build a video streaming website with good UI, a good recommendation/discovery algorithm, it's own avertising network (that is able to compete with YTs excellent personalized ads while having a more creator-friendly policy), spend more on human review of copyright claims than YT, establish a revenue share system for creators, as well as a system to pay monthly pledges similar to YT channel memberships or pa…

This is a perfect project for a successful entrepreneur who wants to solve a hard problem just like the Duckduckgo founder. This is the type of hard problem I'm getting more and more interested in. Someone has to bring the future open and privacy oriented Web about some day. The current model is broken and the early Internet showed us what is possible. Web 2.0 brought none of the democratization it promised largely b…

> Web 2.0 brought none of the democratization it promised

It introduced formula "If you're not paying for a product, you are the product", while in old world model delivery of value is more about givers/takers ratio.

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#63

Post by wolco »

14 wrote: post #2

I for one am glad at this though I am sure the fine could have been exponentially larger. The fact that YouTube can go here and say their platform is only intended for 13 year olds and up is a joke. Their are thousands of shows targeted directly at my kids. I can even clearly hear one video my kid likes to watch starts out with saying “look kids” so tell me how that is not directed at kids. I use an adblocker but whe…

I thought having an account required 13 or over but to view a public video there are no age restrictions.

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#64

Post by point78 »

izacus wrote: post #60
point78 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cartoon nursery rhymes directed at as low as even 1 year olds will sometimes have ads popup for a tv show containing drugs and guns. Completely inappropriate! EVERYTHING that deals with children whether directly or indirectly is strictly regulated, and rightly so. Television programming as an example, for 70 years only permits certain ads to be displayed on children's shows. YouTube should be regulated by the FCC in…

> Cartoon nursery rhymes directed at as low as even 1 year olds will sometimes have ads popup for a tv show containing drugs and guns. Completely inappropriate! Does that still happen if you actually pay for the service via Prermium subscription? Or only if you want to use it completely free and paying nothing?

Free. Just like public broadcasting system is free and when watching Sesame Street an ad for The Wire (Or whatever came up) will not happen.

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#65

Post by longtom »

dgzl wrote: post #46

To be honest, I see quite a lot of inappropriate content on YouTube's tending section pretty often. This can't have a net zero effect on youth.

I think humans are a lot more robust than commonly assumed. Most of us do not break due to their mere experiences as long as their fundamental needs (food, being loved, goals and so on) are fulfilled. Once these needs are not fulfilled they may be more vulnerable though.

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#66

Post by point78 »

midev wrote: post #31
14 wrote: post #2

I for one am glad at this though I am sure the fine could have been exponentially larger. The fact that YouTube can go here and say their platform is only intended for 13 year olds and up is a joke. Their are thousands of shows targeted directly at my kids. I can even clearly hear one video my kid likes to watch starts out with saying “look kids” so tell me how that is not directed at kids. I use an adblocker but whe…

You need to be a parent and not expect regulatory fines to watch your children. You've identified a problem, you've identified the cause, and now you need to do something about it within your household. You're literally talking about a video you let your child watch, while bemoaning the FCC needing to step in. > The fact that YouTube can go here and say their platform is only intended for 13 year olds and up is a jok…

Completely wrong, everything targeted at children (for decades) is regulated. If your kid is watching Sesame Street on PBS and an ad for The Sopranos appears - that does not happen for a reason.

Uploading cartoon nursery rhymes and having an ad for drug trafficking come up is idiotic.

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#67

Post by vkou »

dmix wrote: post #12
pjc50 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a two sided market; the player with the largest catalog wins. Youtube has also negotiated the copyright minefield extremely well - starting a competitor would have to deal with takedowns.

A competitor who finds a way to deal with copyright better, has a sane advertising policy that doesn't randomly demonetizes people, with a patreon system built in, and has a modern UI (YouTube has a lot of room for improvement) it could possibly compete with YouTube. A whole lot of major YouTube channels who are constantly attacked by false copyright claims or have to push product placements due to no ads would love…

> A competitor who finds a way to deal with copyright better, has a sane advertising policy that doesn't randomly demonetizes people, with a patreon system built in, and has a modern UI (YouTube has a lot of room for improvement) it could possibly compete with YouTube.

A competitor that grows to the size of YouTube will face all the same pressures from publishers, legislators, advertisers, and malicious actors, and will almost certainly turn into something that looks a hell of a lot like YouTube does today.

Oh, and since it'll be advertising-supported (Nobody will want to pay $10/month for a significantly-worse to slightly-better YouTube alternative), it'll also be bending over backwards to make advertisers happy... Gosh, I wonder what the likely outcome of that is going to be.

Can you even imagine pitching this to a VC?

"We're going to build a YouTube alternative that doesn't suck, that will piss off major content owners[1], and will be a haven for bad actors. We're going to be amazing, give us money!"

[1] Who will sue us for every cent that we have ever, or will ever own.

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#68

Post by pjc50 »

dmix wrote: post #12
pjc50 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a two sided market; the player with the largest catalog wins. Youtube has also negotiated the copyright minefield extremely well - starting a competitor would have to deal with takedowns.

A competitor who finds a way to deal with copyright better, has a sane advertising policy that doesn't randomly demonetizes people, with a patreon system built in, and has a modern UI (YouTube has a lot of room for improvement) it could possibly compete with YouTube. A whole lot of major YouTube channels who are constantly attacked by false copyright claims or have to push product placements due to no ads would love…

Well, there's at least two other competitors - Vimeo and Dailymotion - but neither has the fame or reach. And Peertube exists, but is comparatively tiny.

A big clue exists when we look at the most viewed (and presumably most lucrative) youtube videos. What do they all have in common? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-viewed_YouTube_vi...

Re: YouTube Said to Be Fined Up to $200M for Children’s Privacy Violations

#70

Post by claudiawerner »

longtom wrote: post #65
dgzl wrote: post #46

To be honest, I see quite a lot of inappropriate content on YouTube's tending section pretty often. This can't have a net zero effect on youth.

I think humans are a lot more robust than commonly assumed. Most of us do not break due to their mere experiences as long as their fundamental needs (food, being loved, goals and so on) are fulfilled. Once these needs are not fulfilled they may be more vulnerable though.

It is, however, important to take note of how this robustness varies with age, just what proportion of people "most" counts as, and whether the most absolute category of humans "breaking" is most appropriate when we take into account the massive variation of mental states, disorders and the entire field of media effects and child psychology.
Post reply on HN