TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

YouTube

Go To

I saw no thread for it, which led me to think that I should start one, so... tada, I guess?


Mod note:

Edited by Mrph1 on Aug 16th 2024 at 1:55:14 PM

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#12151: Aug 13th 2025 at 4:39:48 PM

Well, for many people the answer seems to be, "Whatever lets me keep my ability to play Hentai Scat Lolita #22 [without providing proof of identity]." Or at least that's the impression that's being manipulated here.

Edited by Fighteer on Aug 13th 2025 at 7:41:37 AM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
king15 Have Faun Since: Mar, 2024
Have Faun
#12152: Aug 13th 2025 at 4:47:14 PM

Of course, people have valid reasons to not want to show their identity. Even trustworthy sites can be hacked, and many trustworthy sites are only 'trustworthy'. As for your example, I'm not sure many would defend the artistic merits of that game (though it is a question about whether abhorrent content like that portrayed in purely fictional contexts without the use of real live-aciton actors should be accepted or not), but it's a question of where it stops.

As for YouTube, we can see how ridiculously the desire to protect the kids (and to please the advertisers) has impacted videos. 'Game Ended'. 'Graped'. Try not to mention Nazis. Should historical videos showing the Nazis, deaths, rapes be censored? I'm not saying those should be on YouTube kids, but I'm also not a fan of the idea of them being hidden behind identification.

Resileafs I actually wanted to be Resileaf Since: Jan, 2019
I actually wanted to be Resileaf
#12153: Aug 13th 2025 at 4:50:35 PM

This extends to Wikipedia, which also is blocked (or in the process of being blocked) in the UK because literally everything is on the website in an academic fashion. Should academia be censored because it treats about uncomfortable or obscene subjects?

And again, none of this is done in the interest of safety. That's just the excuse. The real reason is control and censorship of leftist, progressive and LGBTQ+ voices.

Edited by Resileafs on Aug 13th 2025 at 7:52:27 AM

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#12154: Aug 13th 2025 at 5:07:36 PM

Yes, but by the same token everyone seems to agree that there's still a lot of reprehensible content on YouTube even with this aggressive censorship. And frankly, I'm way more concerned about the prevalence of AI slop than I am about censoring the word "suicide", but this illustrates our core problem: the goals of Google are not our goals. Nor are the goals of the US, UK, or German governments, for that matter.

I think we can all broadly agree that "let parents decide for their kids" isn't sufficient. But a "free and open" competitor to YouTube would invariably face the same pressures. Meanwhile, there's this channel about some funny Siberian Huskies that I am not willing to give up.

Edited by Fighteer on Aug 13th 2025 at 8:09:40 AM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Florien The They who said it from statistically, slightly right behind you. Since: Aug, 2019
The They who said it
#12155: Aug 13th 2025 at 6:50:49 PM

Well, for many people the answer seems to be, "Whatever lets me keep my ability to play Hentai Scat Lolita #22 [without providing proof of identity]." Or at least that's the impression that's being manipulated here.

I fail to see the problem that's being implied to exist with this level of minimal identification, beyond "what if someone wants to watch pornography without providing ID, and it was particularly gross porn?" which seems a weak argument to me. "What if it's particularly morally uplifting porn and it can't be watched because of stringent ID requirements" would be just as valid an argument against verification in that case.

Before money is actually changing hands, I really don't see the need to have much identity verification at all, though maybe I'm missing something here.


That said anything that expands parental rights over their children is probably a bad thing, as it stands parents already have obscene amounts of power to the point of being able to arbitrarily and legally seize property from their underage children in most of the world, (perhaps all of it, I haven't checked recently) and corporal punishment remains widespread and de facto legal in places where it's not explicitly legal, despite evidence suggesting it's actively detrimental.

It feels like a lot of these concerns to which online age verification is proposed as a solution are a non-issue in the real world, the main concern for age verification probably should have started and ended at "can we legally collect ad data without opening ourselves up to lawsuits".

MorningStar1337 The Encounter that ended the Dogma from 🤔 Since: Nov, 2012
The Encounter that ended the Dogma
#12156: Aug 13th 2025 at 7:11:19 PM

[up] that bring sup an interesting (though tangential) point. it is said that patriarchy is not "rule by men" per se. its "rule by fathers", the male parent. thus it can be argued that the institution that prop up patriarchy would include those that subjugate the child (regardless of gender. though daughters have it worse for obvious intersectional reasons) as much as it harms the woman.

(TBC I do not intent to downplay women's struggles here. I'm just sharing an observation)

that said this is a tangent that is better suited to a relevant OTC thread if it had to be continued. (again just sharing an observation.)

Edited by MorningStar1337 on Aug 13th 2025 at 7:13:13 AM

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#12157: Aug 13th 2025 at 7:13:42 PM

[up][up] As I predicted, we had both "parents should supervise their children" and "parents should not be allowed to control their children" in the same discussion. They can't both be correct.

Most children do not have the maturity to be left unsupervised on the Internet. That's a non-negotiable. If the parents can't or won't do it, and governments aren't allowed to do it, and platforms aren't allowed to do it... we're left with no controls whatsoever.

[down] News flash: They already know your information.

Edited by Fighteer on Aug 13th 2025 at 10:15:11 AM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
PhysicalStamina ain't nothin' but a party y'all (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Coming soon to theaters
ain't nothin' but a party y'all
#12158: Aug 13th 2025 at 7:14:35 PM

...beyond "what if someone wants to watch pornography without providing ID, and it was particularly gross porn?" which seems a weak argument to me.

It's a disingenuous strawman made to avoid addressing any and all criticism, because it's easier to argue against than "maybe big tech conglomerates shouldn't know all of my personal information".

[up]And why should that by anyone's problem but their parents'?


News flash: They already know your information.

No shit. Some of us think this is a bad thing.

Edited by PhysicalStamina on Aug 13th 2025 at 10:17:35 AM

Do not spare the feelings of those who would not spare yours.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#12159: Aug 13th 2025 at 7:26:12 PM

[up] Sorry, is it your argument that children should have no controls or supervision whatsoever online because we can't trust parents, schools, businesses, or governments?

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Discar Since: Jun, 2009
#12160: Aug 13th 2025 at 7:33:55 PM

Yeah, I'm just gonna go ahead and quote myself.

I really, really hate the ongoing trend of the entire world just going "better technology requires horrific privacy violations, and if you think otherwise that means you're against progress."

I would like to go on social media without the apps tracking my every move. Hell, I'd like to be able to verify my age (for things that genuinely require it) and know that the company isn't going to sell that data to ten other companies. The fact that companies mostly just use this for targeted ads is not really better.

I'm sorry, but I don't feel like "whatever, deal with it" is an acceptable solution.

Well, for many people the answer seems to be, "Whatever lets me keep my ability to play Hentai Scat Lolita #22 [without providing proof of identity]." Or at least that's the impression that's being manipulated here.

It's only been touched on in this thread, but the fact remains that this argument is exactly what the Moral Guardians are using as an excuse. And it always, always follows a very predictable pattern: First they keep the children "safe" from "rape and gross fetishes," and then it turns into banning anything LGBT because it's "too adult."

This is not hypothetical. This round of censorship is already on that step. And as noted, the first step has too many problems all on its own, because it also bans educational material.

Writing a post-post apocalypse LitRPG on RR. Also fanfic stuff.
PhysicalStamina ain't nothin' but a party y'all (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Coming soon to theaters
ain't nothin' but a party y'all
#12161: Aug 13th 2025 at 8:05:51 PM

Sorry, is it your argument that children should have no controls or supervision whatsoever online because we can't trust parents, schools, businesses, or governments?

I'm asking why the solution to a problem a parent or guardian could solve themselves is heavy-handed bills like the UK's Online Safety Act and not one of the several browser extensions listed on one of the multiple articles covering them I found by literally just typing "parental control extensions" in the address bar minutes ago.

If anything my argument is the opposite since I went to schools that understood this. I couldn't just go to any site I wanted in 9th grade homeroom.

EDIT: Seconding [up]. As I've said countless times before, it's easy to get behind this stuff when it only targets things niche pornographic content, but when they start deeming media you actually engage with "obscene" then what?

Edited by PhysicalStamina on Aug 13th 2025 at 11:08:25 AM

Do not spare the feelings of those who would not spare yours.
Florien The They who said it from statistically, slightly right behind you. Since: Aug, 2019
The They who said it
#12162: Aug 13th 2025 at 10:01:28 PM

Most children do not have the maturity to be left unsupervised on the Internet. That's a non-negotiable. If the parents can't or won't do it, and governments aren't allowed to do it, and platforms aren't allowed to do it... we're left with no controls whatsoever.

You see, I don't buy this, I think it actually is pretty negotiable.

What's the actual risk here? (As long as money is prevented from changing hands of course, which can be done pretty easily by hiding the cards.) Damage to equipment? I mean that falls under money, I guess, but I think supervised by parental controls or no it's perfectly possible to brick a machine, and indeed I'd suspect physical damage is the main cause of bricking. Strangers on the internet with dark aims? Far less risky, statistically speaking, than close associates and relatives, and strong parental controls give a lot more power to close associates and relatives.

More importantly, what's the actual risk here with youtube specifically that they're even dealing with by using this data to alter account settings? The closest I can see is government policy threatening them if they don't get in compliance, but the government policies aren't well grounded in realistic concerns, so... like the question is still there, what are we actually protecting minors from by these actions?

megarockman from The Sixth Borough (Experienced Trainee)
#12163: Aug 14th 2025 at 10:49:46 AM

I wonder if a finer gradient on ages would help things. Treating someone who is 16 years old the same as someone 16 months old seem like a bad oversight which would result in absurd outcomes. Maybe have an intermediate step for, I dunno, ages 13-17.999?

The damned queen and the relentless knight.
GearFriedTheKnight BLOCKING - A weapon for the 21st century. from The nearest road that can be raced (Experienced Trainee) Relationship Status: I'm in love with my car
BLOCKING - A weapon for the 21st century.
#12164: Aug 14th 2025 at 10:54:03 AM

[up] Hey, rating boards do that, so it's insane that there's no rating board for online content... oh, wait, there technically is, except it's up to the companies and the companies don't want to rate things because it'd cut into their business.

What's clear is that most companies have proven themselves to be untrustworthy without oversight, and that only outside intervention will get them to do something instead of delegating or pushing the problem on someone else. The issue is, we may be in the second worst historic period for any form of oversight after Reaganomics.

''There's no magic in tuning; yet, it's something that tends to escape from any logic."
tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#12165: Aug 14th 2025 at 11:06:41 AM

It should also be noted that different countries have different ratings systems. On the videogame side, the three most well known ones (ESRB, PEGI, and CERO) all have similar, but different ratings sytems. I wouldn't be surprised if different companies rate things differently.

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
HalfFaust Since: Jan, 2019
#12166: Aug 14th 2025 at 1:16:59 PM

Different ratings boards absolutely make different decisions, yeah. Some prioritise different factors, or use different categories (more obvious on the film side). Notably though, those are fairly well-established organisations who judge specific media "products", there's a definite limited capacity. You can have people sit down and analyse every professional movie that will be shown in theatres, while it would be outright impossible to do that with every video uploaded to YouTube, let alone every other video on the internet.

ShinyCottonCandy Everyone's friend Malamar from Lumiose City (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Everyone's friend Malamar
#12167: Aug 14th 2025 at 1:23:24 PM

Though, the least Youtube could do is if the uploader says a video isn't for kids, don't decide that it is for kids anyway.

Obviously the reverse does not apply.

My musician page
RainingMetal (Handed A Sword) Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#12168: Aug 14th 2025 at 6:51:12 PM

On a very different note, is anyone else running into a glitch in which upon viewing a video fullscreen, the title on the top of the video is for the wrong video?

ASAB: All Sponsors Are Bad.
AngelusNox Warder of the damned from The guard of the gates of oblivion Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
Warder of the damned
#12169: Aug 15th 2025 at 12:32:38 PM

Cross Posted from the Social Media Thread, and also posted here because plenty of the content discussed is also shown on Youtube channels.

Brazilian Social Media Influencer Hytalo Santos and his husband, which ran a Big Brother style "reality show" involving minors along multiple videos of minors dancing with revealing clothes, were arrested over child abuse charges.

The charges resulted from a video from Felipe Bressanim Pereira, known as Felca, exposing the adultification on children on Social Media and how Influencers use children to create content, engagement and revenue.

Felca's video on the subject inflamed discussions over the use and exposition of children in social media, their exploitation from promoting business, cults and up to sexual or sexualized content involving minors. Including the issues on Social Media on how sexual predators openly use Social Media networks to sell or exchange CSAM on the comment sections of sexualized videos involving minors, with the famous "link in bio" comments.

On top of the arrest of the Hytalo Santos, talks over regulating social media, court order take downs of videos from Hytalo and similar creators to Social Media and video channels not limited to Twitter, Youtube, Facebook and Instagram have been issue, are being a hot topic in Brazil as of now.

Felca's video is above and it has English subtitles via youtube.

Inter arma enim silent leges
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#12170: Aug 17th 2025 at 9:29:58 AM

Of course, people have valid reasons to not want to show their identity. Even trustworthy sites can be hacked, and many trustworthy sites are only 'trustworthy'.

This is the conflation I object to, showing your identity doesn’t inherently mean permanently handing over personal data so it can later be stolen via a hack. I show my identify when I go to the supermarket (both on their CCTV and when I show ID to buy age restricted products), but a hacker ain’t getting shit on my if they hack the supermarkets systems (okay they actually are, but that’s because I traded my purchase data for discounts when I got a supermarket loyalty card, nothing to do with the CCTV or me showing ID to buy booze).

I actually don’t think it’s reasonable to say you should be able to buy/consume age restricted products/services without confirming your identity just because you’re doing so via a particular medium, but I also don’t think that’s what most of the people who say that really mean, I think they mean they don’t want their personal data being stored permanently and/or being used for purposes other than confirming their identity, which I totally agree with.

That’s why I’m personally in favour of using trusted intermediaries to do the identity verification, be that the government (probably not trusted enough), banks (they already see all the weird stuff I buy), IS Ps (they can already monitor what I do online if they want) or even random corner shops (that’s where people used to buy their dirty mags back in the day).

Edited by Silasw on Aug 17th 2025 at 5:43:38 PM

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Rabbitearsblog Movie and TV Goddess from United States Since: Jan, 2014 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
Movie and TV Goddess
#12171: Aug 17th 2025 at 4:01:49 PM

Does anyone know about You Tube's newest addition to the live chats called the XP Leaderboard? Apparently, this new feature allows you earn XP points whenever you leave a comment or leave a super chat in a livestream and it kind of functions like the channel points on Twitch. Has anyone used this new feature and is it any good?

I love animation, TV, movies, YOU NAME IT!
Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#12172: Aug 18th 2025 at 7:57:32 AM

Learned from Dan Olson's bluesky about r/AItuber, a subreddit of "youtubers" using AI all wondering why the slop they spend "30 min a week making 2-4 videos per day"note  isn't yet showering them in money.

It's very funny.

Edited by Ghilz on Aug 18th 2025 at 11:06:26 AM

Rabbitearsblog Movie and TV Goddess from United States Since: Jan, 2014 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
Movie and TV Goddess
#12173: Aug 18th 2025 at 8:05:22 AM

[up]

That's pretty ironic of them. While there are some You Tube videos that can gain millions of views in one day, most of the time, it's takes time for a video to gain enough views and with the way that AI is being viewed nowadays, I doubt the AI videos would do well enough on You Tube.

Edited by Rabbitearsblog on Aug 18th 2025 at 8:07:11 AM

I love animation, TV, movies, YOU NAME IT!
Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#12174: Aug 18th 2025 at 8:08:19 AM

One of them that Dan was citing was talking about having spent 300$/week on Youtube ads to push his content, and seemed to not understand at all that 300 worth of ads for youtube is nothing. As Dan says, youtube considers 30000$ spent on ads to be a micro campaign.

NullMoon Since: May, 2024
#12175: Aug 18th 2025 at 8:18:09 AM

That sounds like a microcosm of how a lot of AI defenders see the technology: a way to make a quick buck/gain social clout without having to put any real effort into it whatsoever, with no real passion or interest for the craft the AI is trying to automate.


Total posts: 12,461
Top