> I would consider a 13 year old to be a kid? It doesn't matter what you consider, the law under which they were sued is explicit about the age below which you

> I would consider a 13 year old to be a kid? It doesn't matter what you consider, the law under which they were sued is explicit about the age below which you are not allowed to collect data. This is the reason why almost every website out there asks you if you're older than 13 when you create an account. > You're missing the point of the comment you replied to. The comment I replied to opened with a whole mock narrative about engineers deciding to advertise on kids. My point is that this is a non-trivial and non-obvious issue. As far as Youtube is concerned, they made a site where 13yo+ can upload and watch videos. What ended up happening is that people uploaded videos for kids, and others let their kids watch said videos. It's disingenuous to make it sound like Youtube intentionally planned this. I agree that fines don't do this. And again, the laws are pretty explicit, but this is a complex case, which is what I was trying to convey. It's not an obvious "someone in a dark room wrote code that collects children data".