"And, now, boys and girls (and our special grown-up friends), here is the latest video of Mary with her Uncle Bill. Mary and her Uncle Bill are special friends. See Mary play. See Bill play. See...
"And, now, boys and girls (and our special grown-up friends), here is the latest video of Mary with her Uncle Bill. Mary and her Uncle Bill are special friends. See Mary play. See Bill play. See Bill play with Mary."
I'm sorry. I couldn't help it. It just seems like having an adult present in a video with a minor is a strange way to protect the minor.
I had to Google that. I'm not certain, but it seems to be a line from Mary Poppins? :P And yes, having an adult present is awkward, but I bet it has something to do with creating a policy that is...
I had to Google that. I'm not certain, but it seems to be a line from Mary Poppins? :P
And yes, having an adult present is awkward, but I bet it has something to do with creating a policy that is programmatically enforceable.
It's not a line from anything. It's a parody of the writing style in the old Dick and Jane readers. My point is that there's a VERY BIG loophole in this policy of making sure that an adult is...
It's not a line from anything. It's a parody of the writing style in the old Dick and Jane readers.
My point is that there's a VERY BIG loophole in this policy of making sure that an adult is present in all videos with minors. It's a well-intentioned policy, but it's not very street-smart.
I think that's a step in the right direction, and I would like to see a similar approach to all YouTube. Maybe the consent of an adult should not be required for each post, but at least renewed...
I think that's a step in the right direction, and I would like to see a similar approach to all YouTube. Maybe the consent of an adult should not be required for each post, but at least renewed every X videos.
I may be too old-fashioned, but I don't think someone who's not considered an independent legal entity yet should have its image exposed to the entire internet without supervision. Ever.
Restricting live features: We updated enforcement of our live streaming policy to specifically disallow younger minors from live streaming unless they are clearly accompanied by an adult. Channels not in compliance with this policy may lose their ability to live stream. We also launched new classifiers (machine learning tools that help us identify specific types of content) on our live products to find and remove more of this content.
I don't know how YouTube defines "younger minors", but I presume this means your 16-year-old Starcraft phenom doesn't have to have a parent looking over their shoulders when they broadcast their...
I don't know how YouTube defines "younger minors", but I presume this means your 16-year-old Starcraft phenom doesn't have to have a parent looking over their shoulders when they broadcast their cannon rushes on the ladder. (I guess said phenom would probably be on Twitch, but still.)
Good change, surprised this wasn't policy already.
There's a 9-year-old chess prodigy that regularly streams on twitch, and has been doing it for a couple of years. His parents are monitoring the stream and the chat, the kid doesn't directly interact with chat at all. Very wholesome from what I've seen. Can't imagine it would be a great idea to let Twitch loose on an unsupervised 7-9 year old, and Youtube is only marginally better. But I do wonder if the automatic filtering would ban such a stream, since the parents are usually not on screen although they are clearly actively monitoring the stream and chat.
I'm personally against exposing such a young child to the internet, even in these conditions. But parent supervision makes it acceptable to me, at least.
His parents are monitoring the stream and the chat
I'm personally against exposing such a young child to the internet, even in these conditions. But parent supervision makes it acceptable to me, at least.
Truthfully letting Twitch loose on pretty much anyone isn't a great idea. From my experience twitch chat is, after all, little more than chatroom youtube.
Can't imagine it would be a great idea to let Twitch loose on an unsupervised 7-9 year old
Truthfully letting Twitch loose on pretty much anyone isn't a great idea. From my experience twitch chat is, after all, little more than chatroom youtube.
"And, now, boys and girls (and our special grown-up friends), here is the latest video of Mary with her Uncle Bill. Mary and her Uncle Bill are special friends. See Mary play. See Bill play. See Bill play with Mary."
I'm sorry. I couldn't help it. It just seems like having an adult present in a video with a minor is a strange way to protect the minor.
I had to Google that. I'm not certain, but it seems to be a line from Mary Poppins? :P
And yes, having an adult present is awkward, but I bet it has something to do with creating a policy that is programmatically enforceable.
It's not a line from anything. It's a parody of the writing style in the old Dick and Jane readers.
My point is that there's a VERY BIG loophole in this policy of making sure that an adult is present in all videos with minors. It's a well-intentioned policy, but it's not very street-smart.
I don’t think the idea is to safeguard the children, but to make the adult liable, therefore removing YouTube from litigation.
I think that's a step in the right direction, and I would like to see a similar approach to all YouTube. Maybe the consent of an adult should not be required for each post, but at least renewed every X videos.
I may be too old-fashioned, but I don't think someone who's not considered an independent legal entity yet should have its image exposed to the entire internet without supervision. Ever.
From the link:
I don't know how YouTube defines "younger minors", but I presume this means your 16-year-old Starcraft phenom doesn't have to have a parent looking over their shoulders when they broadcast their cannon rushes on the ladder. (I guess said phenom would probably be on Twitch, but still.)
Good change, surprised this wasn't policy already.
There's a 9-year-old chess prodigy that regularly streams on twitch, and has been doing it for a couple of years. His parents are monitoring the stream and the chat, the kid doesn't directly interact with chat at all. Very wholesome from what I've seen. Can't imagine it would be a great idea to let Twitch loose on an unsupervised 7-9 year old, and Youtube is only marginally better. But I do wonder if the automatic filtering would ban such a stream, since the parents are usually not on screen although they are clearly actively monitoring the stream and chat.
I'm personally against exposing such a young child to the internet, even in these conditions. But parent supervision makes it acceptable to me, at least.
Truthfully letting Twitch loose on pretty much anyone isn't a great idea. From my experience twitch chat is, after all, little more than chatroom youtube.
RIP to the ASMR pedos looking for a quick fix.