3 ms·
I personally think you're missing the point of the article. The content of your videos (based on the example you gave) are harmless. Adorable, in fact. You hav
by movedx 8y ago
I personally think you're missing the point of the article.
The content of your videos (based on the example you gave) are harmless. Adorable, in fact. You have a beautiful daughter - congrats. Sadly you're missing the point that you did the uploading, not her.
The article is about children, I'd say around 11-14 in age on average, possibly late teens too, uploading videos of themselves... themselves. And the videos are adorable videos of them down the park in jeans, they're videos of them in bikinis in their bedrooms. Some of them are videos of them sucking on lollipops... I mean really?
Also, the videos being uploading are flags. They're used to signal to pedophiles: there's other content available outside of this video. They're guiding lights for people who wanted darker content.
Your videos are just your videos, and you moderate them. It's not the same thing at all.
- robbrown451 8y ago> You have a beautiful daughter - congrats. Creep!!! Just kidding.... Thanks, she's the best. :) Point taken. I get a bit defensive here and there, and I guess what I'm more defensive about is reflected more here in the comments, where people are so quick to shame parents for not being so worried about things that I think are non-issues. (note that I am a bit of an outlier at Hacker News, in that I am in general not particularly concerned about privacy...in the sense that I don't worry about, say, Amazon following me around the web because they have figured out that I am in the market for digital pianos and skateboard parts)